The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1903-04-08
JOHNSON AND INGALLS---A CON-
TRAST AND A LESSON.

| Both are nominally Republican and
| Republican victory in both would have
been but another case of the Dutch TAX
ing Holland.
| But there was more than politics or
city affairs in the election in Cleveland
and in Cincinnati, and the result ought
| to teach lesson to those who believe
| that the only way fer the Democrats to
succeed is to put the 1896 boilers in the
lead.
In Cincinnati the Democrats nominated
| Mr. NJ. e. ingalls,, long president of the
Big Four Railroad system He IS man
of character, of wealth, of position, of
| ability, and a lifelong Democrat up to
| 1896. In that year he took the stump
| for Mckinley, making speeches against
| the national ticket in Ohio, West Vir-
ginia, Kentucky and in Virginia. He is
a splendid speaker and was the star
orator in several Mckinley mass meet
| ings In 1900, he took no part whatever
| in the campaign, if he voted at all in
| the national election. In 1903 many
Democrats and Independent citizens con
ceivcd the idea that Mr.. ingalls, would
make winning candidate for Mayor and
redeem the city from the rule of Boss"
Cox, who is worse than Tweed in his
palmy days. Mr.. Ingalls, consented to run
and made an active campaign After he
was nominated it was widely heralded
that If ne succeeded he would be inc
Democratic candidate for Governor and
perhaps for President He made a clean
race but was buried beneath. an adverse
shower of ballots. Reason; he could not
In 1896 he had used his influence to dis |
rupt and weaken the Democratic or
ganization. 1t became demoralized In |
1900 he did nothing to reform the or
6anization. In the meantime, following |
his example of 1885, many Democrats had |
gotten into the habit of voting for some
Republican. This year, when he clearly |
saw the right direction and bravely led |
for real reform. he had no organizations |
with which to work. The time was too |
short to perfect an organization able to |
cope with the Cox Foraker army of train |
ed mon, and he went down in defeat He |
has himself and his boiling record of |
1896 chiefly to thank for the calamity, |
for it is a calamity for so good a man |
tc be defeated by the Cox ring. The |
lesson is that one year you cannot train |
with the enemy and destroy the effee- |
tiveness of party organization, and the |
next year restore that organization and |
make it effective. More than that: No |
man who helped to destroy party loyalty /
can appeal to it successfully and it is
rallying slogan of more potency than
many men like Mr.. ingalls, appreciate
when they temporarily go off after false
gods.
Now for the contrast: In Cleveland,
Ohio. Tom Johnston was elected Mayor
two years ago. While never believing
in free coinage at the ratio of 16 to 1,
Mr.. Johnson had been a loyal Democrat
in 1896 and in 1900, and given the ticket
hearty support. He was known every
where as warm friend of Mr. Bryan,
and as a radical in his devotion to reform
in municipal, State and federal govern
ment. He had platform demanding the
just assessment of railroad and other
corporate property for taxation a three
cent rate for street cars. and other so
called (and miscalled) socialistic meas
that he was "erratic that the conserva-
tive forces would compass his defeat
How was it? He was reelected by an |
increased majority in Hanna's own Re
publican city. His open honesty, his
rugged integrity, his disregard of old
forms and methods his breezy way, his
firm stand for justice and right, always
cranky if directed against tax dodgers) |
won the admiration and approval of the
voters and they gave him rousing vote
of confidence. The Democratic city or
ganization was in perfect trim IN Cleve-
land Mr.. Johnson had not discredited
it and weakened it by supporting a Re
publican candidate for the presidency
1t was able to work effectively for him
and for all Democratic candidates. He
didn't have to take up his time, as Mr.
ingalls, did in Cincinnati, organizing the
Democrats. They were compact, united
ready for the fray. He had always been
in hearty accord and sympathy with the
rank and file of his party. They worked
for him with enthusiasm, and he had
the time to carry the war into the enc
my's camp and make converts to add
to the solid and unbroken Democratic
forces. lie did it successfully, and il he
used spectacular methods, his methods
were all directed to secure victory in
which all the people could share.
Is it necessary to point the moral?