National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1886-05-15

their party. To furnish preteNt tor bolt, an
over the question of re-cnfranohlslng the dis
frnnchised exrebols. Tho legislature at us
next preceding session had submitted TO vote
Of the people nm amendment to the state con.
ttitution providing for the immediate removal
OF all political disabilities imposed By the con.
htItution of 1861. Every Democrat was sure
enough Republican votes TO secure its adoption
by an Overwhelming mojority. But there were
many Republicans In the state, led by
and Representatives Burdotte ana Loan
who were not Of the opinion that gush was
good baIsam ior the wounds INFLICTED by rebel;
opinion among Republicans on this question.
They were confronted in the convention by q
demand that the party should declare itself in
favor Oh the 9mendment, without respect to
any mans right OF private Judgment
PRosCRIpT1vE LIBERALISM.
This Liberal" demand came from Carl
Schurz, the head conspirator, in the debate on
the platform. He did not walt to sec whether
me convention would oDey him but evidently
adverse vote he coveted by threatening q dis.
r1ptiOn of the party. His resolution declared
that the Republican party cordially indorsed,
disqualification" and concluded with tho
words: I'VE earnestly recommend them 10 the
people for their approval and adoption" In
his speech he said:
~ therefore declare In my own name, and
in the name of my friends that this is our
platform. Some such platform will 60 before
the people Of this state at the next election,
their sufifages who does not by his own opiu.
ions, by his ASSOCIATIONS, and by his record
give the lie towhnt Ia declared In the platform
upon which he Is nominated"
Here was a word aud blow with the blow
first. The sword drawn aud the scabbard
thrown nway-n new party formed, and Its
candidate selected, IN advance Of any expires.
sion of opinion on the subject which had been
arranged as the ground for quarrel. The rcso-
luton proposed as Il substitute declared for the
removal Of disabilities las soon as 1t can be
done with safety to the state" and concluded
ns follows:
I'VE concur in the propriety Of the legis.
lature having submitted TO the whole people OF
the state the question whether such time has
now arrived, upon which question we reeog
nize the right Of any member Of the party TO
vote his honest convictions"
THE BOLT.
The adoption of this reasonable substitute
was the signal for the premeditntod bolt, aud,
headed by Scbur2, the minority seeded nom
the convention and became the Liberal Ropub.
lican party of Missouri. The sole ground for
this factiOus conduct was that tho convention
refused TO dictate to the members OF the Re-
publican party how they should vote on
constitutional amendment upon tho wisdom
(which there was at least right TO differ.
Never was the arbitrary power of the political
convention machine invoked for so tyrannloal
purpose as II then was by Carl Schurz: never
was so Gudacious an attempt more righteously
rebukcd.
Mr.. schurz endeavored to Justify his course,
in speech In the Senate at the next session,
by claim that the resolution of the national
convention of 1868, above quoted, was pledge
which the resolution was merely intended to
carry out. But q comparison OF the two at
once refutes him. The inference to DO drawn
from his very attcnuated argument is that he
mud concealed , purpose IN Offering his amend.
purpose never made plain until, in 1870 he at.
tempted to use u as wedge with which to
split the Republican party, 1t contained no
word justifying him In setting himself up rs
the judge Of the time when 1.-THE safety of the
loyal people" would admit OF universal am.
ncsty. And especially II did not refer the sub
jet TO such coalition as he was then engaged
in promoting.
The boiling liberals nominated Gratz Brown
for governor, and the Democrats wildly sup.
ported him. Schur8 and Brown led the
and other able men led the Republican side
Brown was elected. From that time Senator
schurz was In the opposition during the re-
i have thought this recital worth themaking
for the reason already stated--thnt II was the
political machine thus created in Missouri that
mated Horace Greeley for President. II was u
worthy herald Of that motley body.
HOW THEY WE'RE LIBERAL.
The liberality of the Liberals was all toward
the Democrats. They could not bear to sec
any repression of the spirit OF liberty which
that party represented. They never preached
to Democrats tile law OF love toward Ropubli-
| cans. Their charity worked only one way
| They were like those northern peace advocates
| of 1861, aner the war began, who could moi
| abide the shedding of the blood of theil
| brothers, unless 1t was the blood of those
| brothers who were OH the Union side.
| Nor could their great specialist In corruption
| diseases discern any ailment among the De-
| mocracy. II the corruption which had run
| riot during the administration of johnson fol
four years had tainted with disease the Demo
| cratic party which supported him and en-
| joyed his patronage, Dr. Schur2 could discover
| no symptom OF 1t in 1872.
nLAINEs EVIDENT SYMPATHY WITH THEM.
Mr.. Blaine undertakes TO sum up the cause!
| which led TO the Liberal bolt of 1872. lie say
| II was "in some degree u difference OF policy
| but more largely n clashing of personal inter.
esls and ambition" He might safely have at
tributed itwholly TO the latter. The supporters o
| Gen. Grants administration differed with eacl
other on The san Domingo project, on revenue
reform, on civil service reform, on the currency
and on all other questions Of policy that arose
without, in the least, srnininS their relation
with the President, or disturbing the harmony
OF the party by so much MS a jar.
He says "the administration of President
| Grant in some OF It's public measures had fur
nished preteXts, and in some of its political
dlspensations had supplied reasons, for dis
content in various Republican quarters" HC
recites some of these, and while no does no
attempt TO separate the "reasons" from tn
''pretexts," ne makes himself so mu eli tn
apologist of the selfstyled Liberals that 1t /
|
by any higher motive than prudence. II
certainly wishes now to be considered frlendl
to such OF them us survive, always excepting
the boidest and a ,e Of thsm-oaTl sehnrz
against the President rs their warrant for dc
seIting the Republican party. He says:
THE LIBERALS COMPLAINTS.
"The Liberals vigorously denounced wha
they characterized as the military rule OF Gen
Grant. They criticised and condemned tn
personal phases OF the administrations they re
peated the Democratic charge that it wa
grasping undue power; they decried the chan
fsit IN '0U The Youth SOUTH they eo@plaine'
that its patronage was appropriated by leader
inimical to themselves; they saw strong OF
ganization growing up, with its center in tn
which they were Extensively excluded. TIL
deposition OF Senator Sumner from tho chair
manship on foreign relations had estrdngeC
him and alienated his friends"
or the truth or falsity of this arraignmen
Mr.. Blaine has not word TO say.
THE ANSWER To THEM
The performance of clerical services at tn
white house by Gen. Grants wife's brother, a
army officer, and by his trusted army friendsan
former staff officers, Babcock aud Porter, wit
no other than their regular army pay, IN,
nished the sole basis for Sunni IS nonsenslca
gasconadc about military rui,,''
The charge Of "grnsping. undue power wa
not only without foundation, but the rcvers
had been shown 10 be true. sumner denounce
him for not sending commission TO San Di
mingo without authority of Congress, BIT
Grant said he had no power, and waited 70
that authority. a word from him would hay
substituted war for arbitration with Gren
Britain and made him stronger politically tina
the supremest monarch In Europe.
Through what Channels" was the infiuenc
ofthe administration felt at the south except tn
Republicans who had been sent from there b
the people TO either house of Cougress2
Whntle were" inimical" to the Liberal
| and on what grounds; and of what patronage
| were these civil service refOrmers so covetous
What great states were combined and whi
did their senators attempt except TO Tepel IN
brutal assaults made in season and out of SET
ron upon the President? And how much OF
| deprivation was II TO the liberal leaders 10
| excluded from u share In that work?
How could Mr. Sumner have been estrange
by being left of (he never was deposed) frol
J. Tho hCRl of tho EonhtO GnmmllteR on fOralg