Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1882-07-30

There is much talk about consistency in
| the canvass for governor. Indeed, this Is an
| able argument with the boilers. They spend
their consistency and charging inconsistency
! upon the regular Democrats. The inconsis-
tency charged upon the APPEAL consists in
this: 1t has favored every proposition 10
settle the State debt; it sustained the fund
ing bill; advocated the sixty-and-six propo-
sition recommended by Governor Porter; it
was the jealous supporter OF the ifty-and-
State of the debt question the APPEAL
would have recommended the acceptance Of
the sixty and six bill passed by the last Leg
islature. But after fighting Low-tax Demo-
Gratis, and favoring every plan having for its
object the main tenanc OF State credit for
seven years, the APPEAL discovered that the
people had resolved In their hearts not 10
pay more than fifty cents on the dollar, and
to prevent Reputation it has become the adj
vocate of the only basis upon which the
State debt can be finally settled. 1t was a
mistake to repeal the funding bill; mistake
not to accept Governor Porter,s propositions;
still greater mistske not TO accept the fifty
and-four compromise, and now the people
offer ffty-and-three as their basis of a final
settlement, and time will demonstrate that
the advocates of this proposition are doing
more 10 sustain State credit than the sup
porters of the sixty-and-six bill, passed in
de f ance OF the popular will and by Legis-
lature in which the people have no conf
dence. The following article from the Jsok-
son Tribune and Sun, in reply to the Ganstin
Examiner, shows that neither faction of the
Democratic party has any right to claim
consistency on the State debt question:
As the Eraminer puts it the boilers are stand |
ing square upon the platform of two years
sgo and are In line With Al tne ntTeraHces 81 me
latter assumption. Four years ago the Examiner,
and those associated with i IN the present inex,
that no settlement Of the State debt should be
made without having been T., INST ind0rsed by me
years ago the Erdmfrer and its associates stood
Upon platform which declared opposition 70 any
of the State debt that required higher
ate Of taxation for all purposes than forty cents
Three years ago the Examiner and Its associates
hat it was lust to the bondhoiders and honorable
o the State. These are the facts, and utterly de-
he same boat with it, to conkiste ncy this qnes
ion 1t also appears plainly enough to be felttbat
he party not been consistent on the Issue, but
las dealt with II from time TO time best 1t could
consistent with the supreme duty Of holding the
,arty together for the sake OF higher duties and
lot allowing 1t to be wrecked upon q local issue,
md one that cannot rise to any higher dignity
han local policy. 1t is folly for the Examiner |
nd its associates to set up the indefensibe Claim
4 consistency and immaculate virtue upon the |
question. Such pretension deoeives no one. The |
eople are very thoroughly conversant with the
ssue and the relation of all parties to Il. They
that there Is about as much virtue
nd honesty on one side OF it as the other. And
the face of the hundred and-three. its methods
nd its ending and the sixty-andsix, passed in spite
the general and solemn protest OF the people, IL |
Ian f,.r
,ttled in accordance with their views Of justice
nd the equities