New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1884-06-13
m RF1I INDEPENDENTS.

THE TRIBUNE mas some right D duuVSs VIZ
real NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. who have principles
at heart, and not private grudges or selfish
aims. Our worthy friends who have honestly
sought good government, being independent,
do not all agree. Some are not pleased with
the result at Chicago. But we know them
well enough to be sure that they will listen to
reason.
Not one will deny that the nomination OF
Mr. Blaine was fairly made, and by the large
majority of Republican voters. Every step IN
the convention was controlled by opponents of
Mr.. Blaine. down TO the ballOting. Before the
convention met, it was known to all that most
of ..the supporters of Senator Sherman, Senator
Logan. and Senator Harrison, and part OF the
supporters of President Arthur, because of the
popular feeling for Mr.. Blaine in their districts
would 90 to him as soon as they left their own
favorites. This fact made the result inevitable.
When candidate has been thus fairly chosen,
do not men of honor who participated feel some
obligation :;
The true Independents first found voice IN
nrotestiug against methods which defeated the
right of the people to rule. They held that
Imperialism, Bosssm, and The Machine, caused
nominations by skilful use of patronage Mr.
Blaine first became candidate as leader OF
those who sought more free expression OF the
peoples will. Great changes have been
effected Unit rules have gone. civil Service
reform has been enacted, and by President
Arthursso we'll enforced that convention mas
voted without fear favor. Shall those VINO
kicked against the dictation OF leaders, or OF
q the machine now proceed to kick against the
fairly expressed will of the majority
But it is claimed that the majority has gwen
us bad man. Is it not the fact that great
many true independents thought the same OF
General Garfield when he was nominated I
Then they examined with more care, weighed
evidence in a different spirit, and reached a
different conclusion. We know now that the
people did not err when they nominated the
noble man whose death the whole world
mOurned. To many, the keenest pang in that
hour of grief came with the thought that they
had once given ear to SANDER. Is 1t certain
that this time the few are infallible, and the
people shamefully wrong?
. When the Democratic party had shot down Re
publcans at the South it tried to kill off strong
Republicans at the North by charges of fraud.
Public opinion, always too ready to think EVIL,
had become peculiarly sensitive because OF real
corruptions which Republicans had exposed.
Having gained Congress, the Democrats
searched the land as with a fne-tooth comb, for
foul truths or lies that could be made to look
like truth Partisan hatred, private malice,
and hired liars emptied "evidence" into COM
mittees, which took care to blazon before the
world all that UNANIMOUSLY one-sded investiga-
tions could find to damage any Republican.
This wild revel of SANDER beginning with the
Congress Of 1975-'76, lasted until SCARCELY any
man large enough to be the object of partisan
fear or hate had escaped the breath of
scandal. The best Of men have since been COM
PEELED to retract sayings, and change impress
sions formed on such distorted evidence, and in
the frantic passion for SANDER which then pre-
vailed. Many bad men were exposed. But
many of the best men were UNANIMOUSLY
wronged. James A. Garfield was indicated by
the deliberate judgment of the people, and now
the deliberate judgment of the people nomi-
mates James G.. Blaine. No true independent can
feel that without new and most careful re-
view of both sides of the case, he has right to
hold his previous impressions infallible, and to
assume that the millions have no care for viz
tue. But no candid man can give this case such
a review without concluding that another foul
SANDER has been rightly judged by the plain