New Ulm weekly review. [volume] (New Ulm, Minn.) 1878-1892, 1888-07-11
New York's Estimate Of Cleveland.

The rate at which familiarity may breed
contempt when the subject off is proven to
be unworthy of confidence is strikingly dis
played in the public career of Grover Cleve-
land. The following table shows the Cleye-
land malorities given by the City Of Buffalo
and the State of New York in the year 1889
and 1884. The excess whether plurality or
majority, is here classed as majority The
The majorities are all for Cleveland except
that of Buffalo in 1854, which was against
him. In 1882 Cleveland was the candidate
for Governor and in 1884 for President:
1882. 1884.
Bufalo's Cleveland
majority $3.50 1908
New York's Cleveland
majority ..........1 90 ,S54 Loaf
Against Cleveland.
These figures tell a significant and start
ling tale In 1882 Mr.. Cleveland was COM
paratiyely unknown to either New York
State or Buffalo It is true that he had
served a term as Sheriff of the county Of
which Buffalo is the principal city, and that,
in the year named, he was Mayor of that
place. So far as regards his fitness or capac-
#lty, however, for exalted political position
ne ne was an absolutely unknown man.
The upheava1 in politics produced
by the factional fight among the Republicans
in the State of New Z rk had given Cleveland
his opportunity for advancement. AS a rep
resentativeo Of aso-called reform movement
he was chosen Mayor of Buffalo; and while
standing for the same idea Daniel Manning
secured his nomination for Governor. His
election to the Governorship was as tri-
umphant as was his previous elevation to
the Mayoralty.
A glance at the figures will tell the story
OF the regard with which Mr.. Cleveland was
held in 1882 and 1854 by those who knew
! Inn! IN best. The City Of Buffalo, which gave
him I1ll a majority Of. 5s752 in 1882, gave
majority of 1,093 against him in
1854. In 1882 the State Of New York rolled
up q ajority of 49,, S54 for him, but all 4
Whlch1t gave him two years afterward was
just I,047. The reason for. this great change
IN attitude toward Mr.. Cleveland can readily
be pointed out. 1t is this: The people had
found him out They had learned. by a cost
ly humiiating experience, that be was both
morally and mentally unfit for the Governor
ship, that he was arrogant, old-blooded,
selfish and repellent in his dealings with those
which official life had thrown him in. contact
with, and that he lacked both the.ability and
the Inclination to observe any of the pledges
which he had made to the people
The experience which the Stateo New York
had between 1882 and1SS4 has beenrepeate1
on a larger scale by the nation in the interval
which has elapsed since. the latter year The
people OF the country, too, have discovered
that Cleveland, as a reformar, is a hollow and
5pTeIenUlOns sha1n,, VINO has violated his pro-
misses debauched the civil service insulted
and hunlilated the stricken and worthy
soldiers Of the republic and injected
an element of coarseness, ptlgarity
and sordidness into every department
OF the executive branch OF the Government.
1t was an accident only which prevented the
closing of Mr.. Gleyelands political career at
the election of four years ago. By law OF
averages, permit ations or probabilities ever
formulated in mathematics is such an acct
dent likely to be repeated within the next
100 years at least.--St. Louis Globe-Demo.
craft