National Republican., 1883-03-20
Wanted-An Issue.

The Buffalo Courier (democratic) is quite
right in declaring that the Hon. Samuel j.
Randall, of Pennsylvania, must not be chosen
speaker of tho house of representatives, and
the reason it gives is irresistible, to wit be-
cause "he does not represent tho views of a
majority of the democratic party on the tariff
question" And the New York Sun is un-
questionably correct in its comment upon the
CoWier'S position, viz: that "if Mr.. Randall
is TO be prescribed for his opinion on the tariff
his friends may naturally retaliate by pro-
scribing the freetraders in their turn"
Would the SIN have the democracy shrink
from their revenue tariff principle to catch
high protcctionists' votes? Upon what other
| question do the two parties openly differ
True, there was the question of the protection
Of the freedman in his right to vote, carrying
with it the guaranteeing to each state of a
republican form Of government. But that is
hardly an open question now. The demo-
Gratis falsely pretend to agree with the repub-
licans as to that, and the republicans have
not for six years seriously offended their
southern biethorn by attempts to redress the
wrongs SO loudly presented before elections
as reasons for the retention of the republican
party in power.
All parties are agreed on reform ain every
4 Dal
furnish leaders who are opposed to political
methods" and who regard it as a citizens
highest duty to denouucc his own party as
corrupt and its organization us machine"
Both are for civil service reform after the
fashion of its highest priesthood.
II language can be so framed as to give the
people perfect assurance Of noble purposes,
each party can be trusted to come up to the
highest mark. Does the SIN imagine that
even that venerable saint, Samuel j. Tildcn
himself, could more emphatically dcnounce
wrongs Of every kind, or promise reform
more vohcmently than could any sinner in
the democratic camp-John Kelly, for ex-
ample? Or that the republicans are to be
outdone by their opponents in reciting the
beatitudes in their party platform? Or that
if 1t comes to q questioning of the sincerity
Of professions, the republicans will be at
any loss to prove the total unrcliability of
democratic pretensionsp Or, in short, that If
the democrats win mouth, the republicans
cannot rant as well as thoyP
Nay, then, let us begin all around to give
common sense n chance, Let MS by degrees
open ouroyes from the dreams inspired by
adolescent magazinists. Let political facts
break through tho cobwebs of false political
economy. Let the strong meat for men take
the place Of the political syllabub of which
there has been such a surleit. Brobdignag,
the giant, is about TO stretch himself in an
other presidential struggle. Let him find re-
publican kinsmen near him, aud not republi-
can Lilliputians. There has been cant aud
humbuggery enough all around. The peo-
pie have long enough been called
upon to decide upon the gonuinencss
Of leaders Of equally lofty professions. Let
us take 1t for granted that every man in every
party is willing to be or to pretend to be all
that is pure and honest. Between seeming
and being it is very hard to distinguish. Burt
let our great ones present some plain issue
not one of good character, but one of two
opinions on plain question,
In the article of the SIN referring to Mr..
Randall that journal doprecates any opposition
to him in tho democratic ranks on account
of his tariff views, because "thus tho repub.
licans will finally be gratifod by breach in
the democratic party, and by the opportunity
of waging the contest Of 1884 upon the plain
question of protection TO american Industry on
the one hand and a rerenue tariG on tho other"
Let the issue come.
The sior says 1t has advocated the choice of
Mr.. Randall because of his ability, and because
"of his peculiar representative character as
the champion of ECONOMY and reform" Is it
not the age of cant when journal that can
afford to be sensible indulgcs in such barren
nonsense as this? The Sun should urge a di.
vision of parties upon some practical question,
instead of preaching the exceeding purity Of
purity as a sufficiently distinctive creed for
any party.
|