Staunton spectator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1849-1896, 1883-10-02
DUPLICITY AND TREACHERY.
REPUBLICANS IN DISGUISE.
THE QUESTION ANSWERED AND REASON
GIVEN.
HOW TO ANTICIPATE MAHONE'S
POLICY.
rREAcHERoUs RAsoA1s OR HONEST FOOLS.

The orators and leaders of the coalition
party are still engaged in acting treacher-
ously and endeavoring to impose upon the
honest readjuster Democrats who acted
with them when the debt question was an
issue, but who are not Republicans, and
who will not follow such leaders any long
er, when they convinced that they are not
Democrats as they professed. but Republi-
cans in disguise, laboring in behalf of the
stalwart wing Of the Republican party.
When any voter, with the view of learn
ing whether they were Republicans or not,
asked them whether they would, in the
Presidential election of next year, vote for
the nominee of the Democratic or of the
Republican party, they would not give a
straightforward and frank answer, but
would evade doing SO, with the view of de-
ceiving the Democratic voters whom they
are leading into the Republican party. Such
| answers, however, deceive no one who has
any intelligence, but on the contrary con-
vict the leaders of being stalwart Republi
cans who add to their desertion of the Demo
cratic party, the sins of duplicity and
treachery. Seeing how they evaded the
question that was generally asked them, we
suggested that the question should be pro-
pounded in more definite form-one which
they could not evade, and the answer to
which, if they would answer honestly, would
be a confession that there were acting in
behalf of the Republicans whilst masquerad-
ing as coalition readjusters. In our account
of the coalition meeting held here on last
Court-day, which was addressed by Col. W.
E. Sims. of Pittsylvania, and Attorney
General Blair, in referring to the answer of
Blair to the question asked him by Captain
Chas Grattan, we said;-
In reply to the question of Chas. Graf
tan, Esq. .-"Whether he would support in
1884 for President the nominee Of the Dem
ocratic or Republican party? he evaded
by giving the stereotyped reply that 'he
would vote for the candidate he thought
would do most for Virginia"
This kind of an answer deceives no one,
for all know that, if it was his purpose to
|
party, he would not hesitate to say so.
We should like for him and other leaders
and office-holders of that party to answer
this question: eff Hancock were the Demo-
cratic candidate, and Arthur the Republi-
can candidate, which candidate would you
support ?''
Here there could be no room for lodging,
no chance to evade. AS Readiusters they vo-
ted for Hancock and against Arthur in 1880.
Would they do so now or in 1884? 1t not,
why not? Is it because they were Demo-
Gratis then, but are Republicans now?
The truth is we suppose, they were Be
publicans then as they are Republicans
now-they were, at least, aiding the Repub-
licans then as they are doing now-then
they avowed themselves Democrats, now
they decline to do So and next year will
openly avow themselves supporters of the
Republican party.
That we were not mistaken when we
stated that, if the question were PROFOUND
ed in the form we suggested, ''there could
be no room for lodging, no chance to
evade, - is proven by the reply given to it
by the last Valley Vrgiaian, which, speak
ing for Sims, Blair, ''and other leaders and
office-holders Of that party" says that they
"would have no difficulty in answering, y
and that '4hey acouId vote for Arthur."
The Vugiaian not only gives the answer
that ''they would vote for Arthur" but
gives what it considers their reason for it as
follows:
"Hancock would be for the Bourbons and
Arthur for the Liberals, and that is the rea-
son why Sims and Blair would both support
Arthur"
To understand this lang uage properly, it
should be borne in mind that, in the recent
ly adopted nomenclature of the coalitionists,
"Bourbons" mean Democrats, and Glib
erals mean Stalwart Republicans. The
reason given by the Vrqieian then is, when
put into proper language, that Sims and
Blair, and those they represent, would vote
for Arthur because he would be for the
Stalwart Republicans, and against Han
cock because he would be for the Democrats.
The T0gjnian has given the true an
swer, and, as we understand it, the true
reason.
The question now arises: ''Why is it that
these same men in 1880 voted for Hancock
when, as now, he was for the Democrats,
and against Arthur when, as now, he was
for the stalwart Republicans ?''
Was the course they adopted then con-
sistent with that they are now pursuing?
Yes, for both were in support Of the Re
publican party, and they have been consis-
tent in their treacbery; for when pretending
to be supporting Hancock and English in
1880, they were aiding to elect Garfield and
Arthur, for fhey did not vote for the Presi-
dental electors regularly nominated by the
Democratic party, where their votes would
count for the Democratic party, but for the
electors Of the Malone party where their
votes were thrown away, and aided to
that extent the Republican ticket, and if
they could have fooled few more thousand
Democratic Readjusters, the vote Of this
State would have been given to Garfield
and Arthur, as Malone had designed it
should be.
There is nothing more evident than the
fact that, since the Democrats refused to
nominate Malone for Governor, he has been
laboring with ''might and main, and with
a degree of treachery unparalleled in his
tory, in opposition to the Democratic party,
and in aid of the Republican party, and
that, too, whilst protesting to be a better
| Al. q, ,cti
Ben. Hill, Of Georgia, who exposed his
treachery as soon as he entered the Senate.
Mahone's electoral ticket for Hancock and
English, Familiarity known as the "July
ticket, - and so called to distinguish it from
the regular Democratic ticket which was
called the ''lIay ticket was put into the
field for the purpose Of aiding the Republi-
cans to carry the State by dividing the
| Democratic vote This is HOlU we'll under