Year: 1875




Mr.: Donnelly hardly does us JUS
tlce in quoting the last paragraph of
our article on Independent Ac-
ton" and basing thereon an argu-
ment to overthrow our position.
We had stated distinctly in the pre-
cedlng portion of that articls, that
the Independent Anti-Monopolists
had two objections to coalition with
the Democracy. First, that that
party was SO obnoxious to the peo-
pie, because of its record, that they
could not be induced to support it,
Notwithstanding its professions of
Autobiography; and, second, that
the leaders of the Democratic party
cannot guaranty that the success of
that organization will promote the
attainment Of those reforms which
Anti-Monopolists have in view. We
proved that these objections were
we'll taken, and that there was every
reason to believe that Anti-Monopo-
lists had as good opportunity to ad-
vance their cause by coalescing with
the Republican as with the Demo-
cratic party. We then concluded
by adding the paragraph quoted by
MI. Donnelly, to-wir;


Independent action may not enable US to
elect nominees Of our own right away, but
still our votes will not be thrown away. If
We are determined in our refusal to coalesce
with the other parties. they will seek to pre-
vent their own disintegration and our sue
cess by putting their best men in nomina>
tion, and so conducting public affairs as to
give less room for complaint, and thus we
may be indirectly successful in partially
accomplishing what we seek while polling
only meagre minority of the votes.


To make point against us, Mr..
Donnelly ignores all that preceded
this paragraph, and seizes upon it
for a foundation to his reply. He
starts off thus:


Now let US look at this The Temper
ance men have for years past, in this state,
followed precisely this course. They have
kept up separate organization and cast q
meagre minority" of thousand or two
votes; what effect have they had in convert
ing the Republican party or the Democratic
party into Temperance party? Not the
least.


Let US look at this from the other
side. In the first place, the cases
compared are not parallel, and next,
the above statement is not true.
The temperance advocates advanc-
ed but single idea, and one which
the world generally regards as being
without the domain of politics and
belonging properly to religion or
morals. Hence that party could
not claim political significance. Vet,
whenever the two political parties
have been Of nearly equal strength,
in a community where a temperance
organization existed, the effect has
been to induce them both to pay
heed to it's influence and nominate
such candidates as would not be OBJ
noxious to its members. 1t has only
provoked undisguised ridicule and
contempt" where the o.her parties
were too unevenly balanced for it to
affect the continued dominancy of
the stronger. So much for that part
of our friends argument. Again.,
he says:


We are we'll aware that there are, in the
Democratic party. scoins and scores of men
who are entirely in sympathy with the Mo-
! nopolists but we also know that the great
bulk of the Democratic vote, the rank and
| file, the American, German, Irish and
French farmers, laborers and mechanics, are
as sincerely opposed to all schemes to beg
gar the poor and enrich the rich as MI.
Young can possibly be.


We admit the truth of this, but is
it any more true of the masses of
the Democratic, than of the masses
of the Republican party? Most as