Year: 1873

accidents. They must exist, and rightly
based and used are most valuable. But there
is here as everywhere, continual tendency
to degeneration, and it is well for MS all oc-
casionally to ask how far our party relations
are affecting US in our duties as good citi-
Gems.


A party exists because it represents some
principle, or at least some policy. The moro
numerous these principles, and the higher
and wider their scope, the more powerful
and enduring the party. We SEQ organiss-
tons arising every day upon transient quss.
tiens, matters Of immediate practical inter-
est, but with the settlement Of the question
they disappear. Only those parties can hive
from generation to generation which repre-
sent principles of perpetual vitality, and
| that affect the future as well az the past


It may be thought by some that under
form of government where one distinctive
principle is confessedly dominant, as in this
country popular sovereignty, all party d.
visions must have reference merely to points
of practical politics, which as ever shifting,
permit no permanent dividing lines. If this
were so, party could have no cohesion, and
would be only an accidental unity, dissolv-
ing into its individual parts with every new
practical issue. But the political history Of
our country teaches US that this is not 80.
The two great parties have been divided up
on principle from the beginning. They
have, indeed, changed both form and name,
but the radical line of distinction from the
first, has been, that one represented the
principle Of liberty, the other that Of law.
From this as a root, the party policy Of each
has sprung, and our great statesmen have
Joined themsslve to one or the other, accor-
ding as their natural tendencies or acquired
convictions inclined them TO favor the radi.
cal or conservative forms of democracy.


It cannot, of course, be expected that the
majority Of the members Of any party should
test its measures by its dominant principle.
for this implies an amount of intelligence
and reflection which only one here and shere
possesses. But all who are able should do
this. The danger always is that We lose the
citizen in the party man-not intentionally,
but by habitually allowing ourselves to take
one-sided views Of public matters. The par
tial always sinks into the partisan. A self
knowledge of any subject always makes US
dogmatic and positive, full knowledge lib
eral and tolerant. A man who has clear
understanding of the principles he holds,
and tests tie measures of party by them,
will neither be a bigot nor bondsman. He
will do full justice to his political opponents
as understanding the grounds of their poll.
Cyl and he will follow his own party leaders
only when they act in accordance with their
principles.


1t is good sign for country when there
is large number Of men. who, without
claiming to be independent of party, are yet
80 far Independent that they judge all po-
litical questions upon their merits. They
cannot be made the tools of any adroit and
ambitious leader, nor be compelled BY appli-
cation of party discipline to uphold by their
influence measures Of which they do not ap.
prove. Such men are invaluable to the
country. They prevent that allegiance to q
party, which, within certain limits, is right
and necessary. from becoming blind sub
mission, and they make it impossible for
demagogues to advance their selfh ends un-
der the pretence of the public good.


Let it always be acknowledged that man
is true to his party when he is true to its
principles.


No one is bound to follow political. chief,
however able andbrilliant, if he become un-
true to its Evolutionary policy In arraying
himself against such an one he is guilty of no
breach of faith, or act of insubprdination.
Personal devotion and party allegiance are
two things very different, and not to be con-
fused, but the true citizen will not allow him,
self to be bound by either. If he follw
leader and support party, it is because he
deems certain course Of POLITICAL action to
be best, which finds in them its true exponents.
Let them cease to be such exponents, and his
very fidelity to his principles makes him
their opponent.


But there is another form ofpolitical indie,
pondence which ought to prevail more than
it does, in the refusal to support unworthy
candidates. Men are continually nominated
for Office, sometimes for high Office, who are
both morally and often intellectually unfit
Must We vote for them? We are under nc
obligation to do so. Granting upon all prac.
tical questions they agree with us in opinion,
and 20 may 6tly represent US, yet immortality
is crime against the State, and l, as "a citi'
zen, may in no way iudorse it. No party can
demand Of US that, for its transient advantage
VIC should set aside law of public morality
A little right action in this direction by
Christian men, and the community will moi
be asked to exault to public honors mer
whose private lives cannot bear examination
Hartford Chwchman.