The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1895-12-01

for Mr.. Cleveland would violate the .dea
involved in our declaration that there
shall he no third terms as effectuaiy
ca II he were TO have a third "consecu-
tive" term.
Mr.. MEREDITH. says:
One can understand how some persons
can ina CINE that there Is danger In al
lowing person TO remain In the ONCE
OF President longer than two consecutive
terms. One might fear that by so re-
naming, an ambitious and INSCRIPTIONS
President might get such control over the
country as 10 attempt to make the once
hereditary. But IL Is hard TO see where
there Is any more danger IN two CON
secut:ve terms at one time than mere
Is at another. No good reason can De
given for such fear.
But every evil that is anticipated from
three consecutive terms can easily arise
from one term with break and then
two terms consecutively The President
who serves one term and goes out for
one. comes in next time with his cohorts
unbroken lie reappoints all the officers
whom he found during his first term were
10 be depended upon as his personal
followers. and they constitute the tenth
legion" upon which he will graft the
faithful OF the two succeeding terms. We
really think the spirit OF the antl-third
term proposition applies with greater
force 10 a case of that sort than 10 one
Of three consecutive terms. The ambi-
tlous ruler has four years in which TO
bfo 10
the faithful OF the first term TO begin
work with at the commencement of the
second term.
We don't know how II may be with
others. but TO The Times, NJ. Meredith
minimizes the source of the opposition
to the third term utterly when he re-
duces II TO a case OF "the assertion that
his denomination would DO against Gus
tom and against the declaration OF JEFF
ferson. when declining reelection 70 the
presidency for the third consecutive
term. II is claimed" says he. that
Jefferson declared against any man hold
ing that office for more than two terms,
and, therefore, that Mr.. Cleveland should
not be renom'nated."
AS far as The Times Is concerned. its
opposition to Mr.. Cleveland's renomina-
ton would be Just as decided If Mr.. JEFF
ferson had never said word on the sub
jet as II is with that declaration from.
him, The Times recognizes substantial
danger to republican institutions in one
man being permitted to be President more
than two terms and 1t would oppose
Mr.. Cleveland's nomination because of
that danger. If it were the first one 20
speak on the subject. The danger in
volved in the proposition is what the
strength Of opposition TO 1t rests upon,
and not the fact that Mr.. Jefferson and
General Washington pronounced against
IL.
There Is a good deal in Mr.. Merediths
letter we would like to comment on, but
space is precious, and we pass TO mis-
remarks under the last head. He says
we need Mr.. Cleveland to lead a cam
paign against TRUSTS" AS far as we
know the word Trust" as ordinarily I'M
derstood in relation to industrial COM
DlidllollSf HdS lOt ItC'lNtu ltCOsIllLtd
legal definition. We therefore do not
know certainly what a Trust" is. and
we are therefore unable to see how Mr..
Cleveland is going to lead a. campaign
against them. But We do know that
when Mr.. Meredith says The Times has
argued for d combination of several cor
porations being allowable. unless pro-
vided for in their charters. he puts The
Times into a position IL has never oc-
cupied. If he can show one line or word
Of The Times utterances that maintains
that corporations shall be allowed TO
form combinations he will immensely
surprise The Times
We have often thought of. but never
discussed that branch of tie question.
|