Public ledger. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1865-1893, 1881-04-21
Aitst an act EepsAllns the same" q
fleakkau

After an act fepsAllns the same" q
Grattan.
"All that talk Of the readjuster par
~ being composed Of negroes is not
bosh. IT. DIS" statements regarding
particular localities may be ali true,
and yet the fact will not down even at
the word "bosh" that the republican
negroes constitute the factor tnat gives
the former any weight at all in general
elections. In one of his articles, writ
ten for the LEDGER" T. D. speaks of a
great and glorious victory gained by
the readiusters in a state contest over
the combined opposition of the two
old parties. Now, | wonderif"T D."
ever heard of an equally glorious de-
feat experienced by these mighty read
~justers in the late presidential cleo
ton? Polling only 10000 votes in that
election, how could they beat the
funders in any election unless sup
ported by the almost entire vote of the
negroes2
limo instance has ST. D. shown how
the funders have been false TO a single
principle of democracy, or abated a
jot of their hostility to radicalism.
That debt paying republicans and
iunders have allied to beat some ram
pant readjusters is not denied. But
there has been no desertion Of the
democratic colors on the part of the
funders. They are true democrats,
while not only have readjusters coal
esced with republicans all over the
state, but the spectacle is presented
to day Of this element espousing the
side Of the republicans In congress
and bitterly fighting against the ma
tional democracy. But the readjust-
ers try to place upon the shoulders of
the funders the responsibility for the
separate Hancock electoral ticket sup
ported by them. In vain is the at
tempt. The funders made every effort
to conciliate local differences, ~professed
their willingness to share equally the
electoral college with their rivals,
and beseeched them join with them in
saving the state from the disgrace Of
radical triumph. And what did they
do under these most trying circum-
stances but return a reply only re-
markabie for lis cool extravaganza and
uureasoping impertinence. In their
arrogant notions of their own import
ance, they claimed a majority and were
sorely amazed to find hal they con-
stituted but one fourth Of the white
voting population.
What think you, fellow.citizens, of
a party whose open mention it is to
desecrate the venerable bench of the
supreme court of Virginia by driving
out of Office those incorruptible Juices
who have opposed Them in their
sweeping designs? What think you
of a party which tears out one-arm
Confederate soldiers from the Offices
of sergeant. alarms and door keeper
of the legislature to fill them with
negroes, as a price of negro votes to
elect a readjuster senator to con-
gress ? - Of a party that at
to further ingratiate negro
votes by sweeping from the statute
hookslaws that such shining lights as
Massey and Lacy advocated not many
moons ago-of a party in fine hat is
even now joining the believing re-
publicans in yelling and bowling for a
fair ballot aud an honest count"
when the ballot is a thousand times
more free in the south than in radical
Rhode Island with its iniquitous dis
iranchising laws? Democrats of Ten
ncsscee, settle your differences in the
bosom of the old party which has
welded the scepter of rule in this
country twelve wears longer than all
its political rivals, from Washington's
time down. Away with your new
parties!' The democracy is yet des-
tined to recover all that it has lost.
Corruption, fddlesticks 1t is no
more corrupted than the present party
be with four million voters.
Styling yourself a true democrat"
and yet proposing a new party are you
not pe~rpetrating a grim, grand, and
CHASTITY joke, ~. DIP" l.. G.. 7.