The Portland daily press., 1883-07-16
The New Hampshire Contest.


Whether Mr.. Chandler will be chosen
United States Senator from New Hampshire
cannot yet be predicted with any certainty.
The two votes taken since Mr.. Rollins with
drew do not indicate the existence of an
ardent enthusiasm ON the part of the Repub-
lican members of the Legislature to honor
him with this Office The number of votes
received by him was the same on Friday as
on Thursday. The next vote will be taken
tomorrow, or if any is taken to-day it will
be simply form to comply with the law.
The members before they vote on Tuesday
will have had an opportunity to confer with
their constituents concerning the new con-
dition of the contest, and to some extent
their vote will be an indication of public
sentiment. He may receive larger vote
than last week. 1t would occasion little
surprise if his strength should diminish
But we expect that choice will be effected
during the week.
One thing is plainly taught by this ex-
perience in New Hampshire. 1t is not
new lesson. but only new demonstration of
what has been shown before. There are
limits to the efficiency and the authority of
the caucus as means of selecting candi-
dates. 1t is an excellent machinery in
ordinary circumstances. L will bear a deal
of straining too, but human nature is
stronger than the caucus, as it is stronger
than every other device which has been in
vented to contro the judgments and passions
of men. In the common occasions of strife
for office among men who belong to the
Same party the decision of the caucus will
expressly or tacitly, all agree to abide by
such decision as they might agree to the
decision of an individual umpire or to the
result of casting dice; but, men do not recog-
nize any moral obligation to agree to settle
their differences of judgment by a -caacus,
and aa X ff-ttfry fear p0sseials. A1 ID caucus
methods which seems to them intolerable
they will refuse to resort to such settlement,
as they would refuse to refer a business
matter 10 the arbitration of board they be-
lieved to be committed against them, or to
stake their fortunes in game against loaded
dice.
But it is a serious business to refuse to
defer to the will of the majority of those
viii whom one processes to be working for
common ends, and those who do SO without
good cause lose, and deserve to lose the con-
fidence of their associates. When the men,
bers of the Continental Congress felt it to
be their duty to declare the independence of
the colonies, they recognized that decent
respect to The opinions of mankind required
that they shonld declare the causes which
impelled them to the separation from Great
Britain. And when members of party re-
fuse to submit to the decision of majority
they ought to have reasons which they are
willing TO expose to the judgment of all
men. If they are honest, they ought not to
seem to hesitate to discover their motives.
Reasons that are right and sufficient will
sooner or later justify their action, as surely
as reasons that are selfish, ignoble or made
quate will bring them into condemnation.
If the New Hampshire legislators who re-
fused to vote for Mr.. Rollins and forced him
out of the fight have any common worthy
aim, any higher purpose than to improve
the chances OF other candidates in whose
political fortunes they are interested,
1t is time for them to subordinate
their individual preferences and unite
their forces upon one who represents
their principles. The time has come when
they must justify their course if they are
able. They have beaten Mr. Rollins. Now
what do they propose to do?