The Montgomery advertiser., 1903-09-09
Annur rHrRp rERKs.

Some time ago the Franklin Times printed the following. which we copy be- cause something of the same kind has appeared in a number of State papers. and all of them appear to regard 1t as very fetching argument against The Advertiser and Mir. Cleveland. The Times says:
 Noting how industriously The Mont gomery Advertiser Is waging It's Cleve- land one can not seip put wSa sSa paper thought and said of the third term issue back in 70s, when Grant loomed up as a very probable third term times. wasn't the third term at all if someone else had ben there in the mean time, that the anti-third term talk was a ,d pi tbssp p'eca stromr m writer's de nounce the man on horseback and his followers for presuming to attempt thing that Washington held to be unsafe and dangerous to the Republic!
 If The Advertiser opposed third term for Grant it is estopped from advocating third term for Cleveland, is about the reasoning of a number of our contem- poraries. and that is what they consider ciincher, but 1t isn't. The cases are not analogous in any respect. There is no more comparison between the two men than there Is between Daniel Webster and Zachary Taylor, looking at them solely from the point of view of fitness for the high office of President. We do not mean to compare the administrations of Taylor and Grant as being similar in any respect. Taylor realized that he was from lack of experience in public life not qualified for the office, and with wise perception he called to his cabinet men of eminent fitness and national rep utation Such men as John M. Clayton. George w. Crawford, William B. Preston, Reverdy Johnson and others were cal- culated to make any administration suc- cessful.
 The election of Grant in the first place was a reflection on the intelligence of the American people. He was surrounded and dominated by some of the worst elements of the extreme radical party. His two administrations were little less than dis graceful. and especially is that true of the second term. Boodlers and grafters, mil itary satraps and South haters ruled the country. It was an era of i'll feeling, of military oppression and of official venal- ity. The South, especially, can look back to those days with no other feeling than one of horror, loathfng and bitterness. To liken his administrations to those Of Cleveland is almost a sacrilege.
 But that is not all. To the bitter re- membrance of the past was added dread of the future. Grant had built up a powerful machine while he was In office, and during the four years following the close of his last administration that machine was actively engaged in pre- paring the way for another term, and not only with his connivance but with his active assistance. His foreign trip was heralded to the world as the trium- phant march of a great military para gon and all the honors showered on him were blazoned to this country as a further help to his ambition.
 Nor was this the worst or the greatest objection. We have some recollection of those days, and we have the files and other records to show the feeling that ex- isted. It was the dread of what would follow his candidacy and election that caused apprehension and opposition on | the part of the best elements of the 1 American people. A powerful and un- scrupuloust junta, headed by men like Cameron and Conkling and Logan de- clared that Grant should again be Presi- laient. Cameron boasted-"We will seat I the old man in spite of h-ll," and others
 were little behind him. It was charged by the Democrats and virtually admitted
 by some of his supporters that if he
 was nominated he would be seated whether elected or not. He was to be seated by stealing States. if practicable as Hayes was seated, and if this could not be done he was to be declared elect ed and seated by military force. And
 thinking people felt that if he were thus to be made President the country would
 sink to a military despotism, with Grant
 as dictator
 These are some of the reasons why Grant was so bitterly opposed in 1850
 and they are some of the arguments used
 by The Advertiser in opposition to him | That opposition was founded on mem ories of the past and apprehensions oi the future Not one of these arguments can be used in the case of MT. Cleveland
 He had no machine. for the politicians
 were largely against him. If his two
 terms gave him any special power Il
 has been dIssipated by the eight years
 which have intervened. If he becomes g
 candidate again he will do so without any
 machine back of him.
 It is hard to see why the South, es
 pecially, should make war on MT. Cleve
 land. Not in half a century has there
 been a President who proved his friend
 ship for our section more thoroughly anC
 substantially than he did during both hi:
 terms. He not only called to his Cab
 inet some of the most honored and trust
 ed men of the South Confederates ant
 civilians, but in every way he made i
 plain that he was President of all tn,
 country. and of all the people. And th'
 same result would follow another term
 Besides, neither the South nor any othe
 portion of the country could have an! fear that a third term for him meant life tenure or a dictatorship. If elected
 he would fill his term in a way tha
 would be a credit to the country an'
 would lay down his power at the clos
 with no thought of future office holding
 The Advertiser has no more to expec
 from MT. Cleveland than any other citi
 .o, nas Ua hava adyocafad his nOrnina