The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1881-10-22
EUPHUISTIC.

The Houston Post accuses the HERALD of
being euphuistic, and attempts to ridiculc
the proposition that we made that possibly
the election of Senator David Davis as presi-
dent of the senate was friendly compro-
mise and fraterna understanding between
the democratic and republican senators. 1t
takes the ground that senators Of different
political opinions are at daggers' points pei
sonally. There never was greater mistake
than this. The senators in con-
grcss, as well as the repre-
sentativcs, are almost invariably
on the pleasantcst social relations with each
other regardless of what their politics may
be. The late President Garfield, as partisan
republican as the country afforded when
he was in congress, and ex-senator Thur
man, of Ohio, the grandest democrat of
them all, were as intimate as brothers al
most indeed loved each other as fondly as
though they had been brothers. A great
many people think lawyers bear each other
the deepest hatred because in the court
houses they sometimes say sharp things
and fight so hard against each other, or
their causes, but such is not the case. ON
the contrary there is no guild wherein the
members think more of or will do more for
each other than in the legal profession. We
not intend to say much about cuphuism,
for We do not object to the Post charging
us with it. We strive to be accurate in our
language as well as in our views, and it is
certainly no reflection upon any person to
say that he Is elegant in his dicton, and
that is what euphuism is. II we were ia
say that the Post is pedagogic
or pedantic, we might perhaps
be correct, and certainly the Post would
not have occasion to complain. II is only
those who know how who can be cuphuis-
tic, pedagogic or pedantic, and ii is worth O
vast deal to know how, and much more 10
practice il. Mr.. Conkling has said that
" life is TOO short for political revenges, y
and il is for q surety too short for bicker.
ings and striies and contentious and per.
sonal animosties. Why should republican
senator's and democratic senators be at en-.
nifty because they differ politically? They
know that each party, like unto religious
sects, has the same object in view, the welfare
and prosperity the country taking differ
ent methods to attain the same ends, and
why should they have feelings of personal
animosity because they do not think alike,
If the ocean were always quiet, Il would
soon grow stagnant and all the world would
become imprcgnated with the malaria II
would breed; and III there were but one 20.
litcal party in this country, corruption and
fraud and misrulc would cnsuc In II little
time and ruin, anarchy and ntcmccinC
strife quickly follow 1t is the discussion Of
great problems of state and of policy 10y
the political parties of the country that pre-.
serves It's Institutions that keeps il intact
and that gives Il strength, progress and
prosperity In the multitude Of this coun-
sci the truth Is eliminated and that which
Is best for the country is adopted. 1t "a
only the small-minded man who takes um.
bragg at his neighbor for not thinking MS he
docs, snd that man must he unhappy in.
decd who bears malice, hatred and cnmity
In his heart for those ofhis fellow men who
cannot occupy the same around and
look from the same standpoint with
him upon and at the many
que,ticns, political, social, financial and
otherwise that arise every day in life. We
are surprised that the Post should assert
that senators of opposite political views are