The times. (Owosso, Mich.) 1882-1897, 1895-04-19
A SOUTHERNER IN '96
SUGGEST IN CONCERNING THE DEM
OCRATlC PRESIDENTIAL NOMINEE.

Inc washington Post Thinks the South
Has Been Too Long Neglected by the
National Democratic Party-Senator Hill
Indorses the Suggestion.
Why should not the Democrats nomi-
nate southern man next year? Why
wouldn't that be the right thing to do
the courageous, the consistent, the euui-
table thing? Why, indeed?
Thirty years have passed since the
close Of the war between the states. In
that time nearly all the men who
brought on that melancholy conflict or
took active part in it have disappeared.
OF the few who still survive and who
occupy public on conspicuous position
1t may be truly said that they are as good
citizens-as loyal, as patriotic, as truly
devoted to the re-established union-as
any of their fellow countrymen.
They have served in the cabinet and
in congress, they have held high place
in moments of emergency, and at no
time or under any circumstances have
they proved delinquent in anything that
goes to make faithful, intelligent and
jealous representatives of the Union
and its institutions.
They have yielded precedence to none
in jealous advocacy of the country and
the flag.
AS for the southern people in general
tho present generation-they know Of
the war only by hearsay and tradition.
To them the War is mere abstraction,
hardly personal memory.
Saving the pride they take in the val
or and devotion of their fathers-a SEN
timent which honors them-they think
and remember nothing of the war.
They have no thought or dream which
does not include the glory, the great
ness and the porpetuity of the Union.
How much longer is the south, the
most distinotively American section Of
the country, to be the poor relation in
the family of the states? Upon what
hypothesis does the Democratic party
propose to exclude from recognition
and from leadership three-fourths of it's
strength, its substance and its brains?
Without the south the national Democ-
raoy would be an inconsiderable factor
in national affairs.
Its potency, its consequence its
weight, come from the south. Take
away the south, and the Democratic
party, SO far as concerns national af-
fairs, would be a poor and Intellectual
thing.
Why, then, does the party hold to the
south's reluctant lips the bitter cup Of
self placement, and why is it that a
proud, intelligent and homogeneous
people bring themselves to drink
Where is the justice, the propriety, the
wisdom, of the arrangement?
1t is difficult, looking at the matter
nationally, to understand the attitude
of the national party and the acquies-
cence of the south. Here we have three
fourths of an organization quietly sub
uniting to domination by the other
fourth and tamely indorsing stigma
which it should by every consideration
of dignity resent.
For two decades and more it has been
an accepted theory that southern can
didate would alarm the American peo-
pie.
And during all that time the southern
Democracy have assented without pro-
test, meekly borne the heat and burden
of successive campaigns, furnished the
rank and file for all the great battles
and stood aside in humble Difference
while the fruits of their strength and
prowess were divided among the men,
bers of an insignificant contingent. But
why?
At most this was only an expedient.
1t was never essentially matter Of
principle and proprioty. Southern men
were just as much citizens of the
United States in 1866 as they are today.
The arrangement is preposterous. 1t
is an arrangement under which the ma
tional Democracy cannot much longer
be held together. The south has sat be-
low the salt for 30 years, and in all that
time the south has supplied the ban
quet, not only with the salt itself, but
with every one of the viands it was used
to SAVIOR. For how many more years will
the south endure this degradation and
the north continue to profit by it?
Why not southern Democrat for
l896?-Washington Post.