The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1884-12-24
POst-MOrtems.

Who was the cause of the republican
defeat in the national election seems to
be as much a mooted question as I" who
killed Cock Robin?" Chairman Jones
of the national republican committee
has recently taken hand in the dis
cussion of the matter. This authority
undertakes to lay the responsibility for
defeat at the door of President Arthur
and his cabinet. He declares that
neither President Arthur nor his cabi-
net, with possibly two or three excep-
tions, gave that loyal support to the
ticket that was to have been expected
from republicans" 1t is true that Mr..
Arthur did not take the stump in per-
son, or assume the management of
party affairs in New York. No one,
not even the most ardent partisan of
Mr.. Blaine, could have expected or de-
sired it. Moreover, the active partici-
patton of the president or the depart
ments in the canvass would have been
in direct contravention of the national
platform. The president telegraphed
Mr.. Blaine his congratulations upon
his nomination and assured him of his
cordial support. He had it in every
way consistent with the dignity and
duties of the office of president. On
this point, Secretary Chandler, an ar
dent partisan of Mr.. Blaine, in a
reply to Chairman Jones, asserts that
"neither the president nor any member
of his cabinet lacked desire for a re-
publican success, or failed to do all
that was asked or could have been
reasonably expected of them to accom-
plish." The part in the canvass taken
by Secretary Chandler himself, Secre-
tary Gresham of the treasury depart
ment, Secretary Lincoln of the war de-
partment, Judge Lawrence of the treas
ury department and Commissioner Dud-
ley of the pension bureau, fully sustains
the defender of the president and his
cabinet. Having covered Washington,
the secretary takes the field against the
assailant In his disposition of him,
the secretary is " short, sharp and de-
cisive." 1t is Z" not his Intention" he
says, to make couster-attacks " on
Mr.. Jones and the national committee;
but Mr.. Jones "was an unknown man
when he was made chairman of the
national committee, and he conducted
the party to defeat" and, in short,
" managed our campaign of disaster"
and is now " falsely charging the
president and cabinet with the response
bility. Respecting these chickering's, we
fully agree with the Free Press that
" elimination and recrimination within
the party are fruitess at the best, and
at the present time may prove much
worse than fruitless. The interests of
the party demand a union against the
common foe. Our chiefest concern
ought to be to win the next election,
and to bring this about we must GER
tainly stop quarrelling." The Boston
Advertiser regards this discussion as
fruitless, and respecting the cause of
republican disaster and the object of
future concern thus gets down to bed
rock: "There is no need of looking
away from the Chicago convention for
the causes of republican defeat. Every
thing of loss or disaster that happened
afterwards was predicted by those men,
bers of the party who resisted, to the
best of their ability, the nomination
then made. But it is, as we said at
the start, worse than useless to continue
the discussion of these causes or re-
suits; and especially is it folly to in
dulge in examinations and recriminations
over an issue that cannot be changed.
What the republican party needs to be
concerned with now is, not what lost
the last election, but how to deserve to
win the next one. And the settlement
of this question is in no way advanced
by prolonging and intensifying fac
tional quarrels."