Year: 1868

country peacefully according to tn,
ideas of true Republieanism. Wha


have we to do? We have got TO pa,


this national debt. That we have 90


to do. How? How do you pay you


own debts? To use a Sucker phrase


you either pay in cash or good trade


That is how we propose to pay it. Tht
Democrats knew how to carry on wa
without money. We poor Black Re
Z publicans cannot do that. They knew
! how to restrain the rebellion by per
suading the enemy, by compromising


with them, when the enemy said, "l
would not live with you, you cowardly
dogs, if you gave me a piece of paper


blank, and let me write my own terms
upon it."


Inasmuch as you have violated all
your oaths and shown YOU can't be
trusted, as YOU killed our people


ravaged our country and involved us
in debt, we require that your penitence
is genuine and sincere. That is good
Methodist doctrine. Applause. A
voice, "Take them on probatiOn."l


THE NATIONAL DEBT.


To pay this debt we must have


peace-that the country may move on
quietly, then we propose to pay this
debt. What do the Democrats say
about that? Why they have another
"a shorter way of paying their debts.
That if l understand it, means, sub
stantially, to issue one note in pay
ment of another. / confess that is
not all there is of it; but am talking
about Pendletonian Democracy.
IN rnnrn in
payment of another. They differ and
they do not take much pains to tell us
what they really mean to do. They
give us a general system, but they lose
sight of the fact that their candidate
for the Presidency has denounced that
scheme with more bitterness than any
member of the party. And knowing
Democrats that understood this thing
know that the whole thing is the
most speciOus of humbugs. The
Democratic party has no more idea OF
issuing greenbacks to pay the national
debt than they have of paying that
debt in gold. Their platform don't
recognize it. The falsity of the plat
form is, that men at one end of the
line say it is to be paid in gold, and
those at the other end of the line state
nothing but greenbacks, without
seeming to be inconsistent. Now l
have said that, and it is very serious
charge against that party.


POsTERITY.


Somebody says to me, "YOu talk of
leaving this debt to posterity." /
say to him, "Sir, when l die, / expect
to leave my pOsterity all 1 have.
The posterity of this generation will
take all the debts and property of this
generation" We have shed blood,
given our time, borne the agony and
anxiety of this great struggle, and we
propose to pay the interest upon the
debt, and the principal as fast as we
can. But pOsterity, as it will get all
we have saved of the government,
and liberty, and all the property we
earn, can afford to take the burdens with
the blessings. They can bear it.
Let them take it; and by letting them
we discharge our duties. Let them
discharge their duties as well as we do.
In a very few years these States that
have been deSOlated by war will have
recovered their prosperity. They will
contribute their share to pay the
DuDllC uCDl- Ills COuullN II lAlCIcdS-
ing in population so fast that in fifty
years it will be more than double
what it now is; its measure of pros
perity will be greater, and the debt
will sink into insignificance.


OUR PROSPERITY.


There is no occasion to be alarmed
about it. The country is prosperous
now, and here l will remark that in
addition to the other achievements of
the Republican party, we have
q system of finance that
has safely tided us through the storm
and left us at the return of peace, in
prosperous circumstances / see pres
ent some gentlemen who have
Outlived war, and asked them if it
was not true that in this country and
in England if the close of every great
war has not been signalized by depre-
citation in trade and almost universal
Butwe havesO managed
our finances that none of these evils
have come upon us. We have a
of prosperity unequaled in
any other country under such cir
The Republican war
policy was wise; the Republican
financial policy was wise the Repub-
lican policy of abolishing slavery was
wise; the Republican reconstruction
policy was wise; the Republican
of u. S. Grant was the
wiseSt of them all. Loud applause


GENERAL GRANT.


The Democracy say they do not
like General Grant. In all kindness
to Democratic friends, let me remark
that that party, up TO the time Cen
eral Grant became conspicuous as a
candidate for the Office of Presidency,
the nominee of the Republican party,
their mouths were full with his
praise. There was a time, at the
beginning of the war, perhaps, when
Grant was a Democrat he
was Democrat then, but joined the
great Union party to save the
He came with Sherman
and Sheridan from the Democratic
party, and old Pap" Thomas came
rom the Wing party, "a voice, "and
Logan from the Democrats that
las been playing the mischief for
7ears- 1t seems since that Whig
party died nothing can go right.
But the Democrats were not certain
hat General Grant might go back to
he old faith, like some of the rest of
hem. They took Blair because they
lid want to have a General; and when
hey did that they took about the
hardest Old-fashiOned Abolitionist in
he country. Blair is a clever fellow
nd a clever soldier. l shall not dis
,ute his merits here. No man could
lave been more Objectionable to them
han he. But they are very well
,leased at getting him-they are
ickled at it. If General Grant could
lave been got they actually would
lave shed their clothes. They do not
ike him. They say he is a fool.
What a compliment that is to Lee
nd to the rebels South, that we should
lave one numbskull that should whip |
he whole crowd? What would We |
ave done if we had had a man of !
ense? Frank Blair, Thomas and
sherman are acquainted and are pretty |
-oOd judges of what it takes to make
soldier. They speak not only highly |
# him, but praise him-he suits all |
he country and the whole world. l
AIRY along with me Mr.. Pollard's
history of the war, and if you look at
t you will find that these Peace Dem
crats of the North are the only men
hat underrate General Grant. The
ebels say he was a good soldier;
'Ollard says he was magnanimous
nan. He is. He was a man of
FOnderful powers of combination.
Foreign writers speak of him in the
Iighest terms as being the great Cen
raj of the century. Republicans
peak of him well, but the Democrats
ate him. They are the only eXcep-