Year: 1875

lI5 tiS OPPOoAbAOh W olllo btlhBCAOuo lhlONd-
ton rs if it were a personal opposition to
President Grant. The arguments against a
third term would be equally cogent if General
Grant were q Washington or a Jefferson.
Whatever democratic politicians may think
of President Grants personal character, he
has the confidence of the republicans in q
larger measure than any other citizen belong
ing to their party. In some important re-
spects he possesses tho confidence of the
country at large, especially on that feature of
the financial question which the Western
democrats have so imprudently brought
into fresh prominence. If the Presidential
election should turn on that issue the per-
sonal trust in General Grants fidelity to the
principles of his veto is strong that his party
would be tempted to renominate him. Even
apart from this question the republicans
would make him their candidate next year if
second. 1t is not what the democrats think
of his personal character but what the re-
publicans think of it, that can have any in
fluence on the action of the Republican
National Convention. The democratic party
will not nominate the republican candidate,
and the only danger of third term lies in
the possible action of political party the
great body of whose members feel no personal
hostility to President Grant, but cherish
toward him sentiments of kindly respect and
admiration. An unscrupulous, personal
war would only strengthen him with
hic o1 mi xub form of hi,
own party. To allege that General Grant
is a weak, incompetent or unfaithful Presi-
dent is no more valid argument against
third term than it would be against second
term, and it tends to confuse and obscure the
real question. The only effect of reckless
personal vilification would be to help the
Presidents third term aspirations by revul-
sion of republican feeling against what his
party deem unjust attacks. Aside from the
third term General Grant is the strongest
candidate the republican party could bring
into the field in the great campaign of 1876,
and so far as opposition to the third term is
put upon personal grounds it tends to defeat
itself against a candidate who stands higher
than any rival in the confidence of his own
party. 1t is not by personal attacks and
depreciation that his nomination can be
defeated, but only by general conviction in
the republican party that even wise and
patriotic President could not be safely elected
a third time.


The various precedents by which the linn
itation to two terms was established derive
their whole weight from political and not at
all from personal reasons Nobody doubts
that Washington would have been as safe,
wise able and useful President during
third term as he was during the first two
but that illustrious patriot had the sagacity
to foresee that the precedent of third term
would be of evil tendency, and his magma
nimity forbade him to accept it. The same
remark applies to Jefferson, who was pressed
to serve another term, but declined with un-
hesitating frmness, pleading the example of
Washington and supporting it by a strong
statement of reasons why none of his success
sors should deviate from it. Jefferson would
have continued to be a great and useful
President if he had been constantly reelected
during his life but, like Washington,
he foresaw the possibility of that station
being sometimes occupied by men of un-
scrupulous ambition, and that some men of
that stamp might subvert our free institu-
tons At the time of Jefferson's first cleo
ton we had q narrow escape from Aaron Burr
as President, and with man like Burr in
that Office, the principle Of perpetual re-
eligibility would lead to the most dangerous
consequences. 1t is the duty of President
Grant to ponder the example Of Washington
and to reflect on the weighty reasons assigned
by jefferson for following the precedent.
In his inconsiderate letter on the third
term General Grant put himself in OPP
position to the views of those illus
trious predecessors He asserted the right
of the people to re-elcct the same
President as often as they please This right
was as perfect in Washington's time and in
Jeffersons time as it is at present, but it was
their opinion that the people should be
warned and protected against their devotion
to popular favorites. 1t was the desire of the
people to bestow third term on Washing
ton and Jefferson but it was the firm con-
yiction of both that the popular will was no
rule of action for tho President. Their far
reaching sagacity looked to the future. While
they knew that their own reelection would
be attended with no immediate danger they
felt constrained to resist the choice Of the
people by q sagacious apprehension of future
consequences. Instead of strongly asserting,
rs President Grant did in his third
term letter, that the will of the people
should be supreme, they thwartod
the popular choice by an abplute


unqualified refusal We wish General Grant
might rise to their level and look NJ this sub
iect from their standpoint. He may be Of
the opinion that, with his acquired expert
oncc, Inc would be more useful President


during third term than when he was now


to the Office. But if tho republican party,