The Cecil Whig. [volume] (Elkton, Md.) 1841-current, 1892-08-27

corruption IN politics affrighted many
good people, for the reason that it was
comparatively new; but that time
passed long ago. Since the late
Samuel J. Tilden gaveius the system OF
practical politics. the alarm has
been raised so often that but little
attention is paid to it now. In point
of fact, it is a much abused alarm. A
party no sooner sees its chance of WIN
ming close contest slipping out of its
hand, than its leaders raise an appalling
| cry of fraud that never ceases until the
successful candidate has been indicted
into office. Men OF sens. know, how
ever, that money IS used freely on both
sideHr-S. -1-srape from this
| necessity in our time. A liberal sum
is nee ded to employ window and poll
men, the custom of serving IN that
i capacity for nothing having become
obsolete, and there are other disburse-
ments no less urgent and no less legit.
innate.
But this year the work of collecting
these alleged corruption funds is mark
ed by some unusual signs. A news
paper which has been yelling itself
hoarse at the Republican managers for
endeavoring to secure money tor the
purpose named now boldly heads such
list itself and appeals strongly to the
public to corrupt the ballot also. The
fact Is its own strongest comment.
When manufacturers who have been
Republicans all their lives contribute
$500 or ST, 900 to the Republican fund
they are at once accused of detauch.
ing the ballet, and there is loud out
cry for their arrest and conviction for
violating the Electoral law. IF a man
who makes living by politics, to
whom it is consequently business" 10
give, contributes an equal sum, he is
held up to public ignominy and scorn
with equal promptitude. But Mr..
Pulitzer can give $4,000 for exactly
the same purpose, and the very moral
journals that have demanded the cruel
fixion of every Republican who gave
to the party fund find his action
entirely proper.
The money which Mr.. Pulitzer gave
was his own and was presumably
acquired by him in some legitimate
way. 1t was consequently his to do
with it as he pleased, provided only that
he did not contribute it for any illegal
purpose. If he wants to spend ten
times that sum. in promoting Cleveland's
election it is largely his own affair, and
while he may be criticised for his
course because it affects a public event,
it must be within reasonable limits and
with his inherent right to SO dispose o:
it constantly in view. But while this
is true of him and,his contribution, it is
no less true OF those Republicans who
give to their party fund. If it is right |
for one side 10 assist the politicians in
this manner, it must also be right for |
the other, and no. -
... -. but fools would
assert the contrary. Had the paper
which he owns and directs not been so
quick toIcry; corruption at others his act
would have excited no comment.
MIR. Cleveland gave $4,000 to the
same kind of corruption fund" four
years ago, and in all probability will
give as much again. Mr.. Whitney
gave no less. Thus the chief apostles
of Democracy are upon record as lend
ing their moral support to a movement
looking to the Influencing of elections
with money. They doubtless intend
that the money shall not be expended
for a corrupt purpose, but in this they
are no better than the contributors to
the Republican fund No prominent
man OF whom we have heard has given
in any other spirit, and the many
charges to the contrary that have been
made froL time to time have been the
sheerest invetions of campaign liars,
political defames and character assas-
SINS.