The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1892-01-09
HILL AND CLEVELAND.

happened that any man has come to the
front as rapidly within short space of
time as he has during the last three
months. Three months ago Cleveland
seemed to be far in the lead, with Hill
poor second; now the situation is re-
versed. 1t looks now as if nothing could
prevent Hill from having a solid dele
| CATION from New York, though whether
that would secure his nomination is
doubtful.
Hills rapid advancement during the
last two or three months has been due
in part to his own skillful and audacious
management and in part to circum-
shaping. Chief among the latter was
the defeat of Mills and the election of
Crisp as Speaker. Mr.. Cleveland made
bad break in that matter by allying
himself openly with losing candidate.
If he had kept out of that contest he
would have been in vastly better shape
at present. He assisted in so framing
the issue that the defeat of Mills was
the defeat OF Cleveland. Hill did not
deserve any particular credit for this,
but he got the benefit of it. He enjoys
the usufruct without having earned it.
which has given the greatest boom to
Hill and contributed most to bring him
to the fore was the capture of the New
| York Legislature. This was largely
due to his own audacity and to the un-
scrupulous use of Tammany methods.
Hill is a political gambler. He takes
desperate chances, lays big stakes, and
generally manages to have the cards
stocked so as to win. As an organizer
| and political strategist he has superiors
in both parties; as formulation of issues
and policies he is contemplate; but as q
bold and INSCRIPTIONS trickster he has
| scarcely an equal. AS politicians go,
| Cleveland is honest, and for that reason
no is at disadvantage with such man
as Hill. Cleveland, as Governor of New
| York, would never have tried to seize
the Legislature as Hill has done. We
doubt if he would even have consented
! to profit by Supreme Court decision
that was as plainly opposed to Justice
and right as that under which the Leg
islature has been stolen. Cleveland be-
lieves in popular elections and popular
government, and we doubt if he would
take political advantage under the
decision of court which overthrow
and set aside popular election.
| Hill would do that and great
| deal worse. Cleveland cares as much
for principle as he does for Office.
| perhaps more. Hill cares nothing at all
for principle, the possession of power
and Office being with him principle
that overshadows all others. How little
he cares for principle is shown by his
recent speeches. in which, attempting to
foreshadow a national policy for his
party, he advised the utter abandonment
of the only principles it has. If the
Democratic party is not in favor of free
trade and free silver coinage, it is not in
favor of nything. Hill advises it to de-
clare that it is not in favor of anything.
| As between such man as that and one
who. like Cleveland, lashes himself to
4 a
to finish. there is no room for COM
parison. Cleveland is honest, though
wrong, and conscientious though mis-
guided. Hill has not principle enough
to give direction to his course. He is
like vessel which cannot be steered be-
cause it has no Roadway.
| For the sake of American politics and
the Republican party we would far
rather see Cleveland nominated for
President than Hill. First, because. as
above intimated, we regard Cleveland
as much the more honest and, there
fore, the safer man of the two, and
| if there is any possibility of the election
of a Democratic President we would
rather see an honest though wrong
headed man than an able, INSCRIPTIONS
trickster. We have never yet had a
President of the Hill type, and it is to
be hoped we never may. His nomina-
ton would be a distinct letting down in
the standard of presidential candidates.
His election would be the installation of
Tammany methods in the White House.
Any Democratic President is bad
enough; such Democratic President as
David b. Hill would be a national ca
lamity in more than mere party sense.
Another reason why we would greatly
prefer to see Cleveland nominated rath-
er than Hill is that the defeat of Cleve-
land would be distinct triumph for
protection. WhomsOever the Republic
ans may nominate he will represent
that principle as much as Mckinley did
in Ohio. Harrison and Blaine are both
strong protectionists. and both have the
courage of their convictions. II Democ-
racy means anything the Democrats
ought to nominate man who represents
the opposite idea. and it goes without
saying that no other man in the Demo
cratic party does that quite as thorough
ly as Cleveland. He is the kind of man
the Republicans would like to beat. In
beating Hill they would know they were
beating political desperate and gam
bier. but in beating Cleveland they
would have the satisfaction of knowing
that they were knocking out free trade.