The Wellington enterprise. [volume] (Wellington, Ohio) 1867-188?, 1884-07-16
The Honor Of a Delegate.

..'.' 'N+ANS AWAY ~ - DOAOooSSe ar'f
Mr.. Curtis, the statesman of Staten
Island, has answered the inquiries OF
Mr.. Youngs, the statesman of Long ISL
and, on the question OF honor raised by
the Rev DR.. Armitage, by Mr.. Youngs,
and by hundreds of thousands of other
persons throughout the country relative
to Mr.. Curtis conduct as delegate to
the Chicago Convention. His entire an
swer is embodied in the sentence:
answer, therefore, distinctly, that do not
think that q delegate who takes part in the
deliberations of convention to the end is
honorably bound to support its action il in
his Judgment it ought not to be supported.
This is like saying, in answer to the
question whether man is bonorably
bound to pay his note. "I do not think
that promissor who gives his note for
debt is honorably bound to pay the
note if in his Judgment the note ought
not to be paid"
There is no culprit in the dock on his
way to the penitentiary for any crime
who can not on the basis Of this answer
construct an equally valid defense.
If asked whether there is any such
thing as duty devolving upon any
man, Mr.. Curtis could answer: "Unless
the man who is to perform it thinks it ia
duty it is not a duty"
Society is carried on, however, by
means of an infinite number of little ex-
press and implied contracts, which re-
solve themselves into presumptions of
law and presumptions Of fact. The ac-,
ceptance of'a trust Of any kind implies
q acontract that this trust will be per-
formed. A person who accepts trust
to preach the gospel to a congregation
does not acquire the right to preach
atheism merely because he happens to
be an atheist, either when he accepts
the trust or afterward. If he were an
atheist he should not have accepted the
trust. So, unless George William Cur
It's believed that the Republican party
as whole, is better than the Demo
cratic, he had no moral right to be one
of its delegates. The Republican party
will always feel under obligations to the
chivalrous gentlemen who are ready to
figure as its saviours from venality and
crime. But when man gets to the
point where he entertains such an opin-
ion of the Republican party as to admit
of his acting in that capacity he is no
longer a Republican. He has no more
right to appear as delegate in order
to save party from its own vices than
q woman has to marry man whom she
BELIEVES to be drunkard, sneak, wife,
beater, and thief in order to reform him.
A lady who marries man whom she
does not respect is infdel to the mar
riage bond in advance. So a politician
who proposes to represent party
only to the extent Of saving that party
upon condition of the party following
him is political infdel and false heart
in the very act of becoming its repre-
sentative. Mr.. Curtis may pretend not
to know this. But if he does not he is
not bright.
Mr.. Curtis should now explain what
he meant by the argument he mado in
reply to the motion offered by dele
gate that no person participate in the
convention but such as would support
its nominees. He urged in effect that
his presence in the convention was O
sufficient pledge that he would support
its nominees, and that therefore the
motion in question was an insult to his
honor. On this ground alone the mo-
ton was withdrawn. But it now
seems that the mover OF the resolution
had the right view Of the matter, and
that Curtis presence was no pledge at
all of anything except that up to that
time his wishes had not been over-ruled.
1t is quite clear from Curtis own letter
that he either now mistakes and for
gets the true mental attitude in which
he stood at the time when he told the
convention that his presence there was
sufficient pledge that he would sup
port its nominees, or he then knew that
he would not support Blaine should he
be nominated. II the latter was the
fact, and Curtis, knowing and fully
realizing that If Blaine should be nom-
mated he would not support him, yet
told the convention that his presence
there was a sufficient pledge that he
would support the nominee, this forms
a dilemma which no words can explain,
and which nolpolite word would be
competent to define. aHi}1 o%j ,LepL0i
1.-The fact is that the motion made by
Mr.. Hawkins, of Tennessee, amounted
TO a testquestion, which, if submitted
to the convention and passed, as it
would have been almost unanimously
butt for the opposition of Mr.. Curtis
and the few kiokers who were acting
with him, would have expelled him
from theiconvention, OF pledged him in
express words to support the nominee.
U Curtis did not then tell the convention
that he had come there to save the Re-
publican party from its own vices, and
that if he failed to have his own way
he would not support the ticket. On
the contrary, he secured the withdrawal
Of the resolution by speech which
every person in the convention under
stood to be a personal pledge that he
l would support the ticket. 1t it was be-
cause MIR. Hawkins supposed Curtis re.
marks torbe an explicit pledge that he
Withdrew his motion. If he had pressed
I his motion, Mr.. Curtis, according to
n his present letter, would have been
\ Obliged to leave the convention. His
place would have been taken by an
4 honorable delegate. Ho would to-day
stand in a far better light before the
country had he vacated his seat. CHI
H. 80 H.. Z m 1 tff.rf r -