Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1882-04-08
Why We Laugh.


Why We Laugh.
simultaneously with the results OF the
Republican primaries in Philadelphia to
at out a delegation for the Cameron
Quay convention, is published some cor
respondence between Wharton Barker
and Senator Mitchell. Barker wrote to
the senator, whom he helped to make
such, that the party in this state was going
to pieces, because Senator Cameron
never has thought it worth while for him
to see the men of Philadelphia who con-
troll in financial and official affairs such
men as William Sellers, Daniel B. Cum
minis, Joseph Wharton and Edward C..
Knight''-and presumably Wharton
Barker and he wanted to know What
Mitchellwas going to do about it. Mitchell
answered in effect that he feels it, he
knows it, he deplores it, that he has felt
it and known it and depl0red it for a
long time. But," it is one thing to
diagnose and another to cure he
hopes - that Mr.. Barker-who is ex-
cluded from even voting at Republi-
can primary-will see to it that Philadel-
phia sends a better delegation to the
next state convention than usual there
must be change of leadership, " if -
not of leaders but - such change
OF front in the face of well-disciplined
adversary is very dangerous feat ; he
does "nOt believe in the political
methods too much and too long prac-
ticed In our state,' and will oppose
them, "but" he must be allowed
to do it in his own way he
is willing to do anything he can to
unite and strengthen the Republican
party for the work which lies before it.,
but while the necessary change of
leaders is going on or possibly before it be-
gins, material dangers threaten the party
by threatening the tariff, the currency,
the even tenor of trade, and the encour-
agement of commerce abroad. These
will suffer while we cross the stream,
unless We make sure of our footing in
passing" What is needed, according to
Mitchell IS is a representative cOnven
tion, with will and mind OF its own--a
body of men who will reflect the senti-
ment Of the localities they represent,
who shall confer, deliberate and decide
what is for the best as to men for the
front, and as to measure for their guild
ance in office" And, to get all this,
Mitchell advises Barker to Invite a
meeting Of good men, first few in quiet
and later more, and so carry your dele
gate elections for good men who have
the confidence of both sides. There must
be a multiple for each side. 1t must be
found sooner or later, and the sooner the
better for all.''
And this conglomeration of "ifs' and
g buts'' which its own writer admits is
"quite unsatisfactory" is paraded by the
Press as "a forcible and manly paper,
which will deepen the public re-
spect for its author "It exhib-
its ability. character, strength and
individuality. 1t is wholly in the
spirit of Mr.. Mitchell's election" What
utter nonsense. If Mr.. Barker were Il
stronger man than he is he might reason
ably be suspected of a deeply satirical
design in waiting to publish this letter
until after the Republican primaries of
Philadelphia had fixed a delegation for
Harrisburg, made up of such as Shotweli,
McManes, Rowan, Bum, ''Bill'' Doug.
lass: Leeds, Smyth and others of that
feather. No more crushing and practi-
cal answer to the fine spun sophistries of
Mitchell could be furnished. His letter
is milk for babes. 1t is a puerile, maun-
dering document, full of platitudes,
without practical suggestion or a sin
gle bold, manly utterance. 1t is con-
sistent with his character as tender to
Cameron. Such men are more dangerous
to the cause of reform than straight-out
bold defenders of the Stalwart faith.