The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1892-04-21

Il
ago that filled us all with hope, the disap-
| pointment was soon revived and contin.
| ued, and, in 1888, the little hope that was
left, was dashed to pieces. The States of
| New York and Indiana were captured by
| the enemy and the Cleveland administra-
ton ended with one term and was sue
| ceeded by Harrison, Blaine q Co., with
| Congress Republican In both branches.
Four years ago, II must he admitted,
there was unbounded confidence and
great expectations OF glorious victory on
/ the part of the especial friends OF Mr..
/ Cleveland. But no Rev. Burchard came
| to his assistance near the close of that cam.
/ paiRn, and Notwithstanding Mr.. Cleveland
| had the power of the administration to
help, he was badly defeated. Ihoueh
| Grover Cleveland failed to carry the State
| of New York in 1888, David B. Hill was re-
| elected Governor by handsome majority.
| Mr.. Hill, as Governor, had satisfied the
/ Democrats; Grover Cleveland, as Presi-
dent, had not. These facts should be
/ considered.
To shift our own fault on others seems
/ to be quite common to human nature, and
hence Mr.. Cleveland's friends have per-
| sistently charged David b. Hill with
| treachery to Cleveland in 1888. In this
4 connection the following extract from the
| New York World Of April l, '92, should
settle the ISLANDER The World is by no
| means Hill paper, ard hence its state
Il
| HILL IN 1888 AND 1892.
From n somewhat lengthy communica-
| ton, written by a reader of The World at
| Fort Scott, Kan, we print the following:
"Would it be out of place for you to say
| that in many Of the States in the election
| of 1888 Mr.. Clevelarid ran far behind the
| State ticket? You have the figures at
| them and frankly say tnat the slander
which Mugwump and so-called Democrats
have heaped upon Gov. Hill to the ell eel
| that he did not give loyal support to the
Presidential ticket in 1888 is without the
semblance of truth2 Will you not say
now, what you know to be the fact, that
Mr.. Hill was elected Governor in 1888 be-
| cause he received the enthusiastic support
| Of every Democrat in the Empire State,
| and that Mr.. Cleveland failed OF election
| because he had not, while President, given
that recognition to the Democrats OF New
York to which they we're entitled?
In 1888 the Mugwumps of your city sup
| ported Mr.. Cleveland; they opposed Mr..
Hill. Mr.. Cleveland was defeated; Mr..
Hill was elected, And is not the moral
of this that Mugwump support in New
York is fatal to the man who receives it?"
First--The allegation that Mr.. Hill be-
| trayed Mr.. Cleveland is a slander; gen
orally repeated yet utterly unfounded
siander. Mr.. Hill acted honestly in 1888.
His running so far ahead OF Mr.: Cleve.
land was due to no treachery OF deal on
his part. 1t was primarily due to Warner
Miller, Hills Republican opponent. 1t
was secondarily due to Mr.. Clevelands
personal unpopularity.
Second-While Mr.. Hill was stumping
the State during the campaign OF 1883 he
advocated Mr.. CleveIand's election IN
every speech, and Mr.. Cleveland's friends
in the Mugwump press were bitter in the
henunciation of Mr.. Hill, apparently re-
fleeing Mr.. Cleveland's personal senti.
ments, he himself refusing, in spite OF
urgent requests, to say one word IN faVor
of Mr.. Hill, and failing TO indorse his
nomination.
David B. Hill wishes to secure Demo-
cratic victory. As Governor OF New YORK,
be labored TO that end with remarkable
success. And this IL why the Democratic
State convention OF New York on the 22nd
Of February last so cordially ana unani-
mously endorsed him. II is scarcely nee
essary to say tnat Mr.. Cleveland and his
friends have the help Of the Republican
organs in defaming Senator Hill. bis po'
iitical opponents in New York have telt
his power and acknowledge it by abusing
him.
The contest, as at present shaped, is
between Hill and Cleveland for the nom
ination, and there should be no difficulty
in deciding between them, we Wlsh
for Democratic success. Mr. bill never
failed to carry New York; Mr.. Cleveland
has. Hill organizes victory, Cleveland
has broughi us disappointment and defeat.
Let the facts be considered and be given
due weight. There Is no need OF getting
into O wrangle over this matter, and surely
Mr.. Cleveland ought TO put stop to this
bolting movement on the part OF ms
the nomination, he and his friends would |
then see the importance of harmony.
As to Mr.. Hills leadership, the follow
ing from, Lieutenant Governor Sheehan OF |
New York, is part of /. published inter-
view in the New York World M OF April Shh nn
has represented Buffalo in the Legislature
for eight years past, and last fall was
elected Lieutenant Governor on the |
ticket with Governor Flower. II will be |
seen that he credits Senator Hill with IN
tearity, saRacity and courage.
81 consider that OF all men in the state, |
ex- Gov. Hill has earned the title OF the |
real leader of the Democracy in View York
State against the protest and aRalnst tue
votes of the many of those now assailing
him, He was elected Governor in 1885
and reelected in 1888. He has demon
strated upon every occasion his ability to /
carry the State. He came to Albany with
the Legislature Republican in both
branches. Before he left bis leadership
was such that he not only elected a
majority of the Legislature on JOINT ballot
in 1891, but, as q consequence thereof, ne
was the unanimous choice OF the Deme-
cratic party for United States Senator,and
was elected to that Office. Before she
turned over the reins OF the State admin
istration the DEMOCRATIC party had secured
a Legislature Democratic In oott. branches
with the consequent assurance that we
would have a Legislative and Congress
sional apportionment based upon the
State and federal census which has been
taken, and which the Democratic party
has been claimed for years.
"His surrender of the Governorship and
his acceptance OF the United States Sena
torship in no way lessened him as the
leader of the party in this State. Rather
ii gave additional evidence that he was,
and 10 today, the recognized leader OF the
party here.
The foregoing will show why 1t was that
the late Democratic State convention OF
New York bonored David b. Hill as IL did,
and nassed by Grover Cleveland. The
success of the Democratic cause is the
object, and with Mr.. Hill as
the candidate every Democrat In the
country may rest assured, that, in voting
for the New York Senator, he is voting
for a Democrat true and tried: Mr. Hill
is undoubtedly the choice OF the Demo-
Gratis of the Empive State for PRESIDENT
and without that State we cannot hope
for success. The late result in Rhode
Island shows that we need expect moth
ing from New England. Surely the dele
gates in the Chicago convention from ke-
publican States will have too much good
sense to attempt to force canuliase
upon Democratic States that these States
Naulh IL mt hA hazardous |