The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1882-10-08
Judge FOlger's Ethics.

uOcuiueut 1hhIeIhicai bys EN- Ia that the
triumph OF ones party is such a transcen-
IDENTIFY important public o oiect that tho means
by which the nominate IN Of a candidate has
been effected, even II grossly fraudulent, may
be and ought to be overlooked by the voters
OF that party. 1t is the very same doctrine
by which appointment men In the Repub
lican party Justified to their own consciences
the seating OF HAYES In the chair OF the
Presidency, although they knew that he had
not been honestly elected 1t Is just as easy
| and as logical to carry this kind Of ethics
into elections as it is to reason It out In re-
| gard to nominations.
| A nomination by the representative body
Of party is a preliminary election. 1t is the
| authoritative designation of q candidate
| and his election Is the ratification OF that
choice by tho voters. II there has been
fraud In effecting the nomination, its ratiflca-
ton at the polls is a ratification OF the fraud;
and the very men who were cheated by the
| fraud in the Convention. and prevented from
| bringing about the nomination OF another
| candidate, are expected to ratify that
fraud at the polls, because II they do not
they will ruin their party and will allow the
other party to prevail 1t is Of no conse-
Quence in this kind Of reasoning that the can
| didate himself had no hand In the fraud.
No one supposes that Judge FoLaER had
anything to do with the fraudulent telegram
which procured the substitution in the place
| OF Mr. ROBERTSON OF person who voted
differently from the way In which ROBERT
SON might have voted II he had been present.
But Judge FoLGER has to confront the fact
that his nomination was In truth brought
about by o trick although he did not partic-
pate in that trick, and although he disap-
proves OF 1t and denounces it. He confronts
| it by saying that IL he were now to decline the
nomination, he would ruin the party. This,
he says, Is too great a responsibility to put
| upon one man, and he will not assume 1t.
| He transfers the responsibility to the voters.
He does not himself ratify the fraud, but he
calls upon the voters to ratify 1t. He leaves
| 1t to them to say whether the fact that the
friends Of another candidate were cheated In
the Convention Is such an occurrence that
they ought to allow 1t to prevent the triumph
OF their party; and he argues with them that
they ought not to suffer 1t to have this effect,
because the success Of the party Is an object
Of such supreme public Importance that the
voters ought to overlook even fraud In
effecting nomination.
ment, important as they are, there is no such
thing as IN ethical system for men in politi-
cal life different from the ethics on which
men act in private life Notwithstanding the
fact that men otherwise respectable and up
right do things in politics which they would
be ashamed to do in private affairs, the
honest part Of mankind will not admit of the
soundness OF this distinction. They will not
o6 hot thnro 10 e,,ab Is,kf no
cause they know that it is false distinc-
ton. They know that the importance OF an
object can never justify the use Of fraud to
attain 1t.
When a political party is In such an unfor-
tunate position that it has to 60 before the
people with q candidate for very high Office
whose nomination has been brought about
by fraudulent means. the voters are asked to
overlook those means, because II they do
not the party will be beaten at the polls
The voters are, therefore, obliged to confront
the question whether tho triumph OF their
party in the election OF that candidate is a
matter OF such supreme Importance that they
can with good consciences say that the
means by which their Convention was
brought to the selection OF that candidate are
OF no consequence. This, In our judgment,
multitudes Of honest Republicans will not
say. They will not say 1t, because 1t fastens
upon their party principle OF action that is
utterly false, and that would lead 1t to con-
sequences which no party can face and con-
tinue to live.
Suppose that this nomination OF Judge
FoLGER should be ratified at the polls by
every Republican voter in the State and that
he should be elected, what would be the pre-
cedent established in the party 1t would be
this That when Convention OF the party
has put In nomination candidate who would
not have had a majority Of votes in the Con-
vention II a trick had not been resOrted to
which affected the organization Of the body,
and the friends Of another candidate have
thus been prevented from obtaining for him
an equal chance to secure majority, the
Importance Of party victory Is such that
the voters at the polls ought to sink every
consideration OF the methods introduced into
the action Of the party, and to allow fraud
and trickery to become recognized agent
and factor in party action.
II there are Republicans who believe that
their party can afford to face these conse-
quences, they are welcome to their opinions.
For our part, we do not believe that any
party can afford it. We believe that there
will be great many Republican voters who
will be unwilling to accept Judge Fol-
GERS reasoning. They will ask themselves
whether, after all, they are in any such
| dilemma as he aims to put them in. They
will ask themselves whether the election OF
| CLEVELAND, just as good man for the office
of Governor as Judge FoLGER, is going to be
such public calamity to the State or the ma
ton, that out Of regard for the safety of the re-
| public they ought to prevent it by voting for
| FoLdER, and SO accept the alternative OF
fastening upon their party such q method Of
acting in it's conventions as that by which
| his nomination was effected They will
also be likely to ask themselves whether
their nominating conventions, for the selec-
ton Of candidates for their highest State
offices, are to become bodies for the mere
registration of DEGREES issued by the head
Of the Federal Government. This is far
more important question for the Re-