The sun., 1900-02-01
THE Anti Addicks mutusl admiration
party is in doubt as to which is which
N neither Pub is Dem. or Dem. is Pub.

" neither Pub. ia Dem. or Dem. is Pub.
ANTI.ApDIcKs organs and advocates of
every political persuasion agree in oppos-
ing the Union Republican proposition
for Republican party unity.
This agreement il an agreement against
the Republican party and principle, and |
in favor OF the Democratic party--in
favor Of continued Democratic misrue |
in this Stale. No analysis Of the local
political situation, or of Republican
party conditions, can disprove this state
ment. It's truth is self-evident.
This general truth as to local politics.
and the particularly important minor
truth that this agreed to opposition to
the Union Republican harmony proposi-
tian il mainly Democratic, ought TO
make every earnest and sincere Republ
can Of the State tically suspicious a
every hase Of that opposition ought 10
cause the rejection Of eveiy reason for
that opposition tia, is nal true asto fact,
and chat is not based upon sol I'd poll
tical policy. that, indeed, il tie only
reasonable and tenable 10 iiion fl r.
public Ms TO assume in airy case. IN this
case ruth is essential. TIutil makes for
unity; fasehood far division.
IFis objected that the proposed ap-
poripnment Of delegates 10 the state con
vention is unfair, tllatt tile Union Repub-
llcans changed the appor;ionmenb in
1896 without reason or authority, and
That the oniy acceptable apportionmeut
is that of 1868, Il is also objected that
underlhe proposed appnr,ionment the
Union Rrpu Iicans would control the
convention, that they would select the
delegates to the Republican National
Convention, and atttrwari c, ntrol party
affairs IN bis State. II is further o.ject-
ed tia Mr.. j. EdN ard Addicks may e
elected Unit, Sta e. Senator from Della
ware. This, we think, covers the win lie
dy # the opposition. No ones objec
tion is left our. There is not a single
valid or foreeful obiecti n, 10 an earnest,
sincere Republican, il the whole lot.
The charge of unfairness in tie legis.
la i've apportionment does not lie against
the Union Republicans. 1t was ad pted
By the Anti Addicks constitutional con-
vention from which the Union Repubi.
can delegates elected were excluded. Ii
it is fair enough for legislative purposes,
it is fair enough for PARTY purposes. But
suppose it is not fair enough ior either
of these purposes. 1t ought to be accept
able to IT'D authors for any purpose
within the scope Of It's use. But still, its
ad dlIittpd unfairness, ii that is TO be ad-
hltted, does not constitutes valid reason
fur the rejection of the Union Republic
can proposition. On the contrary, lis
faults are the m 1st forcefn arguments
fr the acceptance Of that proposition
These faults can never be rectied eXcplt
by Republican forces and that can never
be accomplished il Republicans are 10
expend time and effort 10 secure the de
feat Of their party because they may not
approve OF some party rule, or because
they may dislike some one who las
achieved prominence in their party
The objection charging he Unien Re-
pubicais With an irlegular aud illegal
amendment Of the apportionnltns rule II
the ia III, is not tue as 10 sta EN- III. .
The change was made by tile Republican
CONVENTION Of 1876, lie regularity and
ga ly Of which Vas not qrcsiiont d
uitil after the ANTI Addirk7 deltea es
lad balrd and succeeded in usur, ing
seats in tie Republican Nali nal Oh
venton. It was questioned then in
order to give an appearance oi regularity
to the boltlng Anti Addicks organiza-
tlen. Ttat State convention was rrgu.
lar and iu-luritative. L could 81 right
do anything WitEiutIe scope of conven-
tlon power and moreover, Tie boting
Anti Adaicks delegates elected to that
convention are bound by It's action SO
long as they clam the Republican name.
The Objection is not valid
The objection to Union Republican
control OF the proposed State convention.
the election Of delegates 10 the National
Convention, and control Of party affairs
in the State afterward, is trivial and cap
tious; is hot such an otjtctiun as a
sincere Republican would make, What
is anticipated in this oil ction could
not occur without the assent OF major
ity Of the Republican Voters, and if it
occurred in that way, wherein is it OBJ
jectionabe? Democrats would object,
but their objections should not count
for anything in Republican politics,
except il be to excite vigorous counter
objectious-Demncratic abuse ougl t
!. to recommend Republicans to Repub-
: LEANS.
We co ne now to the one objection in