National Republican., 1882-11-02
In ISnnlY.


The editor of the Washington Post
treated its readers yesterday to all edi-
torial more than IL column in length de-
voted to Mr. Editor Gorham," to which
the following is our reply:
l. TIE REPUBLICAN did call upon the
editor of the Post by name to rebuke the
President for receiving a call from his
brother in New York. This was bit of
irony which seemed to us to indicate
fairly the spirit in which the President
had been treated in the Post during the
campaign.
2. The wisdom of Editor Gorham's" "
course with reference to the Malone
movement was vindicated last year by
the action of the Republican party OF
Virginia and by a Coalition majority OF
10000. Let those laugh that win. When
editor Gorham" excites the energetic
disapproval of the Bourbon press he does
not thereby show that he has "gone
mad" On the contrary, he makes it all
the clearer that he speaks forth the words
of truth and soberness.
8. The General Malone of the Posts
Imagination has no existence. The real
General Malone has not only not asked
the removal of any person from public
employment for failure to contribute to
the Virginia campaign fund, but no per-
son in office has been solicited to con-
tribute by his committee, or. by him, or
under his sanction or direction, unless
that person was one whose retention
in place he desires or approves. The
contrary of this has been constantly
stated, but we affirm the truth of what
we say, and defy any man to attack it
with evidence. There is not more
honorable man in American politics than
General Malone, nor one of whom the
Bourbon politicians stand more in fear.
OF course he does not expect praise from
those he does so much to humiliate,
4. editor Gorham " never wrote one Of
the paragraphs concerning. General Chal-
mers which the Post copies from the Ma
TIoNAL REPUBLICAN, with SO much unc-
ton. He is responsible for them, be-
cause he did not look at and exclude
them, as he did many others of the
same sort which met his eye. From Ed
itor Hutchins's present relations with
the clever and pungenr writer of those
paragraphs, it would require no stretch
of the Imagination to suppose that in
hunting them up and credting them to
editor Gorham" personally, the Post
had perpetrated a practical joke. We
spare the paragraphist from any nearer
allusion.
We support General Chalmers now be-
cause he is representative man of those
Democrats who dare rebel against the
Bourbon yoke. In this we are consistent.
If we mustsupport and oppose only those
we have supported and opposed before,
why does Editor Hutchins support Gen.
eral Butler in Massachusetts and oppose
General Chalmers in Mississippi?
3. In June, 1879, we did say: "When
the Southern Ethiopian can change his
skin, the Southern leopard can change
his spots, and not before"
BY Southern leopards were meant the
Bourbons who have no political opinions
waich have not for their bases sectional
and race hatred. The phrase is good
one, and may stand.
Finally, we sympathize with the editor
of the Post. He has many parts to play
in the present political drama, and may
be excused for occasional faults. To
maintain good standing in the Demo,
cratic party, to engineer the Blaine boom
and prove that Blaine is to the Bourbon
Democracy both terrible foe and tender
friend, and all the while to be rather
more for than against President Arthur's
administration-the taken together are
no holiday tasks. However, if any rider
in the great American political circus can
perform this thrilling act, it is the versa.
tile, able, and unprejudiced gentleman
who presides over the impartial columns
of the Washington Post.