Year: 1879

4 Democratic newspaper in Mobile, Ala,
annoyed perhaps by the comments which have
been current upon the personnel OF the Demo
cratic majority in Congress, asks If the
"Union be truly restored, what has the fact
" of a man having been an ex-COnfederate or
"an ex-Fcderal officer to do with
:" his qualifications to sit in the Sen
ate of the United States Why is the
"preseuce of Confederate officers in Congress
"any more to be commented upon than the
presence there of Confederate privates y
We recognize the inquiries as pertinent, and
not unnatural. We can well understand bow
illusions to the civil and military history of
that sad failure, tho attempted Southern
Confederacy. may be offensive to those con-
cerned IN it. 1t seems very ungraclOaS, after
these gentlemen have surrendered and been
pard0ned and restored TO the citizen
ship they had forfeited, and returned
to Congress, to be continually reminding them
of that stupendous blunder and crime. SO
far as regards distinctions between the Con-
federate officers and privates there are none;
the presence of one in Congress is not more
worthy of comment than of another; they Of
Tended equally and have both been pardoned.
y III
for a seat in Congress are not affected by the
fact Of his having served in either army.
Comments on these things, then. would
seem to be irrelevant and needless. 1t is not
TO be wondered at that our Democratic friends
should show impatiencc and chafe under them.
They are unpleasant reminders of a great
mistake, a criminal blunder, of a succession of
reverses and defeats, and final disaster. IT
would be much better for the nation to put
these melancholy memories behind it, and
lifting up its face to a smiling future, go for
ward.


But have these gentlemen who are so hurt
by history ever considered at whose order we
stand still here looking backward Who is it
that has turned us about and compelled Us TO
recall these hateful memories and face the
odlous comparisons they suggest Who but
the Democratic majority in Congress, who in
both branches of Congress and in their news
paper organs began Immediately upon their
coming to power to shout out their purpose
to repeal the legislation of these eighteen
years of Radical misrule u Could there
have been more distinct defiance and chal
lenge to the record 7 When these men came
bounding into power with the rebel yell and
the demand for repeal of laws which had been
made necessary by their rebellious enterprise,
what was more natural than to ask
where they learned that yell, and
why they should make SO furious an
onset against these particular laws They
themselves have, as Mr.. Garfield says, opened
the book at the chapter where they turned
down the leaf in 1861. The people of this
country have in many elections since 1861
recorded deliberate judgment against the
Democratic party; through four weary years
they registered 1t in blood battle-felds.
And now we are told not only that the Judgment
has been reversed and the party taken again
into public confidence, but that with the
change there goes a reversal of the results of
the war and q declaration III favor of the re-
peal of the legislation of that period.


There are great many voters in this
country-sOme OF whom contributed to bring
the Democratic party into powor-whO do not
so understand the matter. When they ask
the reason for this attitude of the ma
iority in Congress, there Is but one answer,
ard that is the record of the men who COM
pose it. 1t may be lnyidiOus to make COM
parsons and offensive to rake up the past,
but how is it possible under the circum-
stances to do otherwiseH The unprcjudiced
observer. looking on the strange spectacle of
a Congress setting itself SO deliberately to
undoing work done by its predecessors
under the stress of deadly peril and
with the approval of the people,
might well wonder at the cause There is
no explanation of it except in the fact that