Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1881-11-12
lancaster fnteIIiQencer.
The New York city Democracy.

The New York city Democracy.
The election returns of New York city
show a nearly evenly divided vote be-
tween the Democrats of Tammany Hall
and the adherents of the County Democ-
racy, the advantage being on the side of
Tammany Hall to the extent of about a
thousand votes. The Republican vote
was but a few thousand larger than that
of either of the halves of the Democratic
party, and the result has been that the
Republican candidate for surrogate was
elected by about third of the vote. For
many years past the divisions in the
Democratic party in the city have given
a number of the Offices to Republicans.
The district attorney for a long time
has been of that party. Democratic
union this year on that Office
secured the nomination of but
one candidate, with the result that
the Republican district attorney de-
clined denomination by his party for
that place and obtained instead the can
didacy for the surrogateship, in which
his chance of election was better because
of the two Democratic candidates. There
could have been 4 union on this office as
well as on the district attorneysGip, but
as it was not one of great political i'm
portance the factions seem to have
thought that they could afford to indulge
their desire to show which was the
strongest.
AS we have said, the result has left
the honors pretty easy between them, al
though it must he a source of greater
satisfaction to the old organization of
Tammany Hall, which was ousted from
the Democratic state convention as no
longer representative of the Democracy of
the city, than to the new County Demo-
cracy organization, which assumed and
was allowed by tue convention to he the
only proper representative of the Dem
Ocrats of New York city and county.
1t was quite notorious, when the action
of the state convention was had, that
Tammany Hall had a very large Demo-
cratic adhesion, and it seemed manifest
" unjust that these Democrats should
not be allowed any representation at all
in the state council of the party. 1t
was defended on the ground, first,
that the Tammany Hall society
WAS not organized on Il Democratic
basis and. second, that it did not re-
present the majority of the city Demo.
Gratis. These were apparently strong
grounds, us Il Democratic convention
ought To require that its delegates shall
represent the majority of the party in
their districts, asccrtained in fair and
democratic. way. But as Tammany
Hall h;lh for half century, more or
less, been accepted by Democratic state
conventions rs the exponent OF the views
of the Democrats of New York city, it
was too late to refuse it this recognition
to be thus representative. This was the
allegation and the result of the vote sus-
tainS it in pf IT. But it shows that Tam
many Hall still represents Il little more
than oEe-Ialf of the Democrats of New
York notwithstanding the setback it
received i'm having the opposing organi-
zation recognized 10y the party in the
state as the real smon-pure Democracy.
And it is also shown that the County
Democratic organization, even less than
Tammany Hall, is entitled to claim to
be the voice of all the Democrats of the
city.
The vote shows distinctly that the
state convention made mistake,
whether it was moved to it by passion, pre-
judice or simply ignorance. 1t is hardly
prolitaIl: to inquire ROW what inspired
it. The fact observed is that the New
York Democrats are divided into two
nearly cqual camps. The national De-
mOcracy want the votes of both. The
state Democracy need them both. Ii
they will not unite: they must be al
lowed equal voice i'm Democratic cOun-
ellis. Tammany Hall especially, having
shown Il larger vote than its rival, cannot
again be sat down upon. This time it
behaved very wisely and magnanimously,
supporting faithfully the state ticket
which it had been denied Il voice in
making. Such !, wrong cannot he pru-
IDENTIFY done it again.
WOIie's Vote.
\ go0;: deal Of discussion is being in