Daily globe., 1882-08-02
THE sTALwART PLEA
For q Democrrtic Nominee In the Fifth
District.

District.
To the Editor OF the Globe:
ST. CLOUD, July 81, 1SS2.-I clip from your
issue of the 2Sth inst. the following editorial
paragraph:
its mission yesterday by doing just what It should
not have done. That is apparently what Dem cratic
committees for. Whether Intentional not, the
action of the committee is simply designed to aid
and strengthen the Washburn- Nelson ring of the
Republican party and to do what is possible to aka
| Democratic success st any future period i'm
possible. This ought to cheer the Bourbon aart. .
The Bourbon is never SO happy as when he sees
step taken backward.
Permit me space in your columns to say a few
words in reply to this, and other items of like
character, recently in Jour paper, equally
broad IN assertion and just as barren of ar
gument. do not propose defense OF the
committee-no vindication is necessary for a
plain duty, performed in good faith. My
purpose is to lay before your Democratic
readers succnct statement, with facts and
figures of political affairs in this district, and
leave them to render the verdict. am moved
to do this by the fact that the GLOBE, while
carefully refraining from stating the relative
strength OF the parties in the Fifth district,
has designated as "Bourbons" those who
favor Democratic nomination. If to be q
Bourbon" is to be placed in the same politi-
cal category as the Seymours, Thurmans and
Pendletons of the party, then, for one, / am
proud of the appellation.
In 1880, the presidential vote in the counties
now comprising the Fifth district was as fol.
lows: Republican 15,442, Democratic S,5O7.
Assuming their claims to be correct, and
that the two Republican candidates
for congress will equally divide their
iua
7,72l, or 7e6 less than the Democratic vote.
At the same election Gen. Sibley received in
these counties 9 1856 votes, showing thatithere
were that number of citizens in the district
who preferred Democrat to Washburn.
Granting that the GLOBE is correct IN desig-
mating Nelson's candidacy as q scheme to
strengthen the Washburn ring, is it not rea-
sonabie to assume that these 1856 votes will
continue to record their ballots gainst that
ring? Not only is this feature OF the outlook as
suring, but 1t is an acknowledged fact that there
are hundreds of Republicans who will not vote
for either Of the candidates now in the field, be-
cause of the disgraceful proceedings at and
prior to the convention, and for the addition
al reason that both are regarded as unfit per-
sons for the position.
With purality Of from !, ,0G0 to !, 900; with
our opponents disrupted and weakened by dis
sentions; with an "off year" in which TO
make fight, it seems to me that il We
failed to place candidate in the field, and
prosecute an active canvass, we would GER
tGinly make q Democratic success at any fn-
ture period impossible. This Is the lightlin
which our Democrats regard the situation.
Permit a comparison In order to illustrate
the GLOBES inconsistency. The counties now
comprising the Fourth district gave Wash
burn majority of $40 over Gen. sibley, one
of the purest and most widely respected Of
MInnesotians. (W.'s majority in the present
Fifth district was 5,1O4 Washburn is sgain
a candidate, and the GLOBE is, very properly,
preparing for Ied-hot campaign against him.
1t is 10 be square issue between him aud the
Democratic nominee - no third candidate.
Now, if it is commendable project for the
Democrats of the Fourth district to make a
fight against the Washburn ring and its 5 ,442
majority, will the GLOBE explain why it is not
equally meritorious for the Democrats of the
Fifth district with plurality in their fduOr OF
from 900 TO SEQ to wage war upon that
same Washburn ring? Any other course
would be dishonorable, and hence would not
be "Bourbonism.
But, says the GLOBE, the nomination of a
Democrat will elect Nelson. Suppose, for ar.
gument's sake, that 1t does have that effect,
will the Democrats be any worse of with
Nelson than with Kindred? Will the latter
not vote with the Republicans on all ques-
tions? By this admission of Kindred's weak
ness with which do not agree) the GLOBE
of the entire voc, yet it advises the Demo
cratic. 40 per cent. of it,sto go over to him
the stronger going to the weaker, instead of
rice rerSd.
In my opinion, Democrats gain nothing by
aiding to pull down one Republican ring, only
to assist In building up another. What diff
ference does it make to us whether it is a
Ramsey, Window, Dunnell or Washburn ring
which holds power and dispenses patronage?
1t were better for us if they were left alone
TO iatten and become so corrupt that the
people will arise and demand a change of
parties in power. The GLOBES missionary ef-
forts foc the regeneration aud puriactti of
the Republican party, by the destruction of
its corrupt rings and the installation Of q
new set of Republican officials, if successful,
will certainly tend to strengthen that organi
zation in public confidence; but how such a
course can aid in promoting Democratic as
tendency is something l cannot perceive.
In calling the convention, the committee
but voiced the unanimous wish of the Fifth
district Democracy. To have doRe otherwise
would have been dishonest and dishonorable-
hence not "Bourbonism. We feel that Eve
have "good fighting chance" and were it
not for the sire in the rear" which comes up
from st. Paul, we could confidently predict q
certain victory. Of course; there is no
"Bourbonism" about the ST. Paul Democrats,
who thus treacherously stab us in the back
G. F. MACDONALD.