Huntsville gazette., 1892-03-26
have an unfair advantage. Where

have an unfair advantage. Whero
great principles are involved it is pos
sible to be quite certain what most
American citizens will do. But be-
tween the possible candidates on the
republican side there is no such divis-
ion or antagonism. All represent the
principles of the republican party.
There would not be the slightest chance
for the nomination Of any man who did
not, nor would the voters Of the party
support such man if nominated.
Honest money, protection, reciprocity,
honest elec.ions-no candidate stands
in the attitude of having a monopoly
of either, nor is there any possible
candidate who is opposed to either. 1t
may therefore be expected that the
great body of republican voters will
support the principles of the party,
whether one or another worthy man
is selected to represent them rs can
didate.
But the democratic party is in diff
ferent case. There one sees not mere
ly a difference in personal preferences,
but antagonism of conviction and in
terest Its voters are not united re-
garding the greatest questions OF prin-
ciples. Some of them detest protec-
tion, while others, more or less indi-
rectly and yet with effect, will strug-
gle to maintain it. Some of them de-
mand free coinage of silver, but others
denounce it. The antagonism here
goes to the very root of party action.
The voters are divided about the fun
damental purposes for which the party
exists. Mr.. Hill represents great
many democrats in his furious out
the monopolists, but he does not exact
ly represent Mr.. Havemeyer Of the
sugar trust, nor Mr.. Hagg1ncf the cop
per com bination, nor the influential
democratic millionaires of the standard
oil interests, nor Senator Brice and
others whose interests are in railroads.
In fact, there is not one thing about
which democrats are united, except a
strong desire to beat the republican
party and get the offices for democrats.
Hence it is that antagonism exists in
that party which goes far deeper than
mere personal preferences. At bottom
the question is whether the party
| shall put the vast power of
the executive into the hands of
| secret friend or into the
hands of an uncompromis.ng foe of
protection; whether it shall intrust the
veto power to a friend or to a foe of free
silver coinage. The men who are in
earnest on either side care infinitely
more about the results they seek than
about the personal instruments to be
selected, and they cannot agree with
each other simply because they do not
want the same results. To the man
who cares for free silver, and considers
that the chief end of democratic exist
ence and effort. there is no sense in
having a democratic party if it is not
to forward that end, and no sense in
electing a democratic president if he
cannot be expected to sign a free-coin-
age bill. So in regard to other issues;
the men who are in earnest about
them have come to the conclusion that
it is just as we'll not to have party at
| all, if they cannot have one which will
in earnest seek to carry out the ob.
| jects for which the party is supported.
1t does not look at present as if the
democrats would be able to get to-
gether in harmony, as usual, and to
put aside purposes and principles, in
dividual convictions and interests, as
they have done SO often, for the sake
of party success. 1t looks as if there
would be dissatisfied malcontents, dis.
gusted and angry men by the thou
sand, no matter which of two paths
the party chooses to take.-N. Y.
Tribune.