Evening journal., 1902-04-02
A nnMAliKAnLn nocuMNNr

A RENIARKABLE DOCU MENI
There are several remarkable state
ments in the Addiclss manifesto pub
lished yesterday. which are worthy of
comment. One paragraph begins In
answer TO your second objection that
Republican unity in this state cannot
be had except upon basis of politi-
cal ostracism Of an individual thereof
etc. Now. in the first place, the Re-
publican proposition mentioned no in-
dividual. and asked for the political
ostracism Of no man. But even grant
ing that the purpose was TO eliminate
Addicks as n senatorial possibility
why would that interfere with his po-
litlcal right? is Il the right OF any
man TO demand seat In the Senate as
the price OF his loyalty to the party?
Is a man ostracizod politically because
his people permit him to do all that
party man may do. yet refuse TO pre-
sent him with the highest Office within
their gift? If so, then the mass of our
voters are politically ostTacized, and
must remain so.
Again there is reference to "debar
ring any man from his constitutional
rights" We admit freely that IL isl
the constitutional right of any man TO
aspire to a seat in the Senate, but il Is
also the constitutional right OF every
man to defeat that aspiration. IL be-
cause Il is the constitutional right of
every man 10 aspire to the Senate, he
should be elected. then Delaware ought
20 have several thousand senator's.
But where do the constitutional rights
of the ten Kent and Sussex men come
in-the ten named by the Regular Re
publicans from which one might be
selected? Should not their wishes be
resDeoted2
Then we are told that the "funda-
mental principle" OF the Republican
party is "That to agree that few
shall have the right to force an aban-
donment OF the oft expressed choice OF
the people. is wholly wrong rs pre-
cedent and destructive OF party disci-
pline" This IS negative and is rather
what the fundamental principle is not
than what Il is But not TO quar-
rel with terms. accepting the above
they have read AddiclSs. their idol
completely out Of the party. Did he
not with his four men set the fashion
OF forcing an abandonment of the ex
pressed choice OF the people" when h'
prevented the election of UniteS
States senator And now the man wh'
did this is to be protected by invoking
the principle Of majority rule.
objection u made to the plan Of Sc
lecting twenty men from whom tw
senators shall be elected. on the groun
that il would make ineligible owe
twenty-one thousand Republican elec
tors. That is rich. and It would b
worth something to know whose brai
conceived it. Does not a caucus whic
agrees on candidate. eliminate thos
twenty-one thousand electors? Do,
not an election do the same? We al
reaching the point where we are pr
pared TO hear the claim that each
these twenty-one thousand persons HI
not only the right to aspire to the c
fee Of senator. but the right to 1
election. This suggests the custom
Kentucky where everyone has the
alienable right TO the title of colon
We are told that the members of 4
Legislature from Kent and Suss
were sent to that body for the purpc
Of voting for Addicks. We suspect
as much That is all they ever {
consistently. They were not sent
the purpose of enacting legislation,
to do the will of all the people. but
vote for Addicks. IL is pertinent
ask whether they We're sent to vote
him for both places? And we vi
also to ask whether he has an inali'
able right to both seats? All we hs
to say on this head is that the Addi'
committee has assigned its legislat'
10 a very low plane
Then comes the proposition for
caucus Of Republican members OF