The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1881-10-13
Bourbonism Intensified.

VIRGINIAN was one of the editors and
proprietors of the Register. The article in
question is a comment upon The views of
Hon. J. f. Lewis OF the political situation
at that time as expressed in resolution
and some remarks of that gentleman in a
Convention held in Alexandria. What
particular pertinence occurrences and ex-
pressions fifteen years ago have to the pres
ent canvass in Virginia we do not under
stand. unless it be to inflame the prejadices
of the ignorant and furnish an excuse for
INSCRIPTIONS politicians to appeal TO them.
one who would attempt to influence another
by such resort is not qualified to exercise
the right of citizenship and is far from
comprehending. in their true import. the
duties of citizenship. At the time the ar
ticle was written. the country had just
emerged from bloody and exasperating
internecine strife. Reason had NOT had time
to assert its authority and control over feel
;ngs aroused by that conf let, as both the
occasion Of the criticism and the critici SIN
itself fully attest. They clearly show that
the writer of the article and the views of
the gentleman referred to were not in ac-
cord-that their sympathies were in antag-
onism. The conclusion furnished is that
Mr.. Lewis was consistent then, as he is now.
with his Union record. He had been elected
to the Convention Of 1861 as Union dele
gate from the county of Rockingham he
acted and eoted in accord with the condi-
tions upon which he was elected. When
the ordinance of secession was introduced
he voted against it. and refused to sign it
when passed, although tn reatened with
personal violence for adhering to his convic-
lions and the understan ling with the peo-
pie OF his county at the time of his cleo
ton. it'll this record, it was natural and
consistent that Mr.. Lewis should have
doubted the policy OF placing the political
power OF the State in the hands OF those
who had precipitated secession and plunged
the country into Il fearful and disastrous
! war. These views We're modified. however,
in the course OF time. and in Is SO, he be-
came the candidate for Lieutenant Govern
or of what is now the Cons ervative Demo-
cratic party, but then the = Irue Republi-
can party, apprehension expressed in
1866, was fully realized when this party
became entrenched in power. Instead of
faithfully atiherine to the pledges given in
that contest. and to the constitutional COM
mands eagerly accepted to secure power.
no sooner was the way clear than reactive
legislation was instituted and passed, and
the very Constitution adopted in 1869 as
the pledge and test Of the faith of the peo-
pie, was so mutilated and eliminated as to
destroy some Of its cardinal conditions and
violate the solemn obligations of the peo-
pie. While this infidelity to pighted faith
was BEING enacted, Mr.. Lewis was true to
his original convictions, and ceased to CO.
bad TINS so tlagrantly abused the power
gwen it and secuted the obligations it had
assumed.
We did not agree with Mr.. lie is in 1866.
and so expressed ourself, just as we would
express ourself now were we to entertain
different views OF State or National policy
to what he does. But in reviewing the past
fifteen years and the political events and
legislative action of Virginia within that
time, we believe it would have been better
for Virginia had the leading politicians been
restricted m their power to do mischief and
the control Of legislation to contravene the
| nj of ha y,la tha 70
in an attitude of defying her own solemn
ordinances. Had they been true to their
promises as given in 1862 and not ruthless
ly violated them. every interest OF the State
would now be advanced /; mischleuous agi-
tation upon questions then thought to be
settled, would not aff1ict, and pu bile atten-
ton be concentrated upon matters of prac-
teal and imperative Importance. Mr.. Lewis
is now sustaining the very policy that the
people endorsed in 1869, and in support of
people Of his State and confidence in their
good intentions as then expressed. And they
would have remained true TO them had itnot
been for the designing politicians. who le-
sorted to the same. vicious appeals to passion
and prejudice to mi+lead them, as are now
being awaited of to avert verdict of con-
domination in the present canvass.
Mr.. Lewis did not agree with this class Of
politicians in 1861; he did not have conf
dence in them in 1866, with devas-
tated country. impoverished homes and
bleeding hearts spread out before him as
the result of their policy, and only coop
Grated with them in 1869 when they ac-
cepted the results of the war they had pro-
voked. in the Constitution adopted that
year. He believed them sincere, after the
suffering they had helped to intlct upon
the people. when they sought the influence
OF a Republican administration to restore
conditions recognizing the new political re-
lations and obligations. The covenant then
entered into, however, was violated. and
thus he and they parted com pany.
| We make these references to show that
Mr.. Lewis was justified in his distrust of the
politcans-not the people-in 1866; and
if we criticised his views then it was be-
cause we did not understand the politicians
as wellas his larger experience and better
opportunities OF judging at that time ens-
bled him to do His whole private and pull :
lie life has been but an expression of kinc-
ness and sympathy for the people OF Il e
State, in everything but their political ten
denotes. He had sufficient reason for dis
trusting the politicians in 1866, and Las
sufficient reason for dstrusting them now.
when the pledges of 1869 are fresh in his
mind, and their violation now of open re-
cord. The arts of the delnagogue have
been only too successful in misleading the
masses into extremes, not for their good,
but that the politicians might attain power;
and it the politicians whom he has opposed
and censured and not the people.
We have no objection to the Register re-
publishing anything that we may have
written fifteen years ago or since. The
article it published last week and relies on
to influence public judgment. only shows
how far the Democratic party is behind the
times. 1t is an exposure, in very prom
inent way, of the intensest Bourbonism, and
illustrates how utterly inadequate that par