Newspaper Page Text
/VL
U
. v,
ts
\CCL t i c: ?/
1’HE ATLANTA SUN
DAILY and WEEKLY
OF SUBSCRIPTION
Uy —single Copy s
mIt* Months....f 10 00 | Three Month* 3 00
jj X Month*.........600
.1 00
One Month
Clubs for Dully—H«r Annum *
flues Copies 27 00 I Eight Cople* 68
roar " 35 00 Ten •• “ 0 '
p T e M 43 00 I Single paper 6
Weekly—Per Annum t
angle Copy 3 00 I Ten Copies. 16 0
Ihwe Copies 6 00 • Twenty Copied - —2» 0t
pr* Copies 8 00 TUty Copies ..65 00
(jne Hundred Copies 00
Weekly for Six Months t
Single Copy. 1 001 Twenty Copies U 4
gS*X?;::::~! S oSfflKisisSS
Jin Copies 7 60 | Single paper 6 cts
VOL. 3, NO. 10.) ATLANTA, GA., WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 28, 1872. { ^5^1108
' CONTENTS
or THk
ATLANTA WEEKLY SU N,?
ros THE WEEK ENDBfO
WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 38th, 187:4.
EDITORIALS BY MB. STEPHEN8-
Orsntend Greeley—The duly of the Democracy.. 2
>'twipeper Changes and Other Matters 1
The Difference Between Greeley and Grant 1
Tweedledum and Tweedledee 1
A Question Unanswered 1
jjeply to the Borne Commercial 1
POLITICAL SUN-STROKES—Pages 1, 2 and 3.
EDITOBIALS-
Verily, Verily, 3; The Unfairness of the Coustitu •
tion In Making Quotations, 2.
STATE CONVENTION OP JEFFERSONIAN DEMO
CRATS—Proceedings, page 3.
POLITICAL ARTICLES—
Rot Answered, False Report Hailed to the Coun
ter, page 2; Letter from Warrenton, Meeting in
Quitman, 3; A Beautiful Tale Badly Spoiled, 3.
PROCEEDINGS OF THE LEGISLATURE—
Page* 5, C, 7 aud 8.
DECISIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT—Page 3.
H. I. KIMBALL—
He and hia Father-in-law Volunteor to Swear, 2,
MISCELLANEOUS—
Dastardly Outrage, 2; The New Election Law, 3;
Vote on tho Gull Railroad Bill, 3; Public Acts and
Uaeolutlons, 4.
EXCERPTS OF FUN AND HUMUB—Page 4.
ADVERTISEMENTS—1, 7 and 8.
Newspaper Change* and other Matters,
We see by the last issue of the Times
& Planter, published in Sparta, in this
State, that the Hancock Sentinel, hereto
fore published in the same place, is
The Difference Between Greeley and I tl thistles ?’
Grant.
This i3 the heading of an article in the
Atlanta Constitution of the 21st instant.
We give it in fall elsewhere in oar col-
merged in the former. Mr. A. Miller I umns Ifc P™T?°*ts to be in reply
DaBose, editor ot the Sentinel, retires, ! *° a late article of oars on the same sab *
and the Times & Planter will, in the fn-! « and OQr attention is specially called
tore, be conducted under the auspices of i to the argument therein presented
Messrs. Harrison, Little & Co. The new We ‘ in tnrn ‘ ““ iWa tllfl
oompany consists of Messrs. R. A. Har-.
risou, F. L. Little and N. £. Harris.
The editorial conduct of the paper will
be chiefly in charge of Messrs. Little
and Harris. Mr. Harris is known to
many of our readers as the talented
young man who took the first honor in
the graduating class at the State Univer
sity, two years ago. He has scholarly
attainments, and is one of the most ac
complished writers among the young men
of the State.
The field of political journalism is at
this time the most inviting of all others
for yonng men of genius, whose high
aims are directed, not to the acquisi
tion of money, but to the nobler objects of
promoting the welfare of the country
and the preservation of its free Institu
tions.
In his very neat salutatory, Mr. Harris
thus speaks of himself, and his own
present political status:
Tub Atlanta Sun says that Greeley is qnito as
ibjoctlonablo as Grant, and there is nothing to ho
leiired by the election of the one over the other,
is The Sun think that it wonld be no triumph for
ear, Colquitt, Jjuicing, Hartridge, Benningand
be hoat of honest patriots who advocates Greeloy to
in the battle over Atkins, Farrow, “Shad" Conley,
iradley and Sheibley, who go for Grant ? Will it be
no triumph for tho intelligent white masses who
vote for Greeley to win the battle over the ignorant,
initial blacks who vote for Grant? Answer these
neitions, sunny, and then you may have your sup-
u.—Rome, Qa,, Commercial.
It would be a personal triumph in
vhich we ishould take pleasare, for onr
riends Lamar, Colquit and others to beat
Sdkins, Farrow aud others on the line
a ted; but it would not be one in which
re could rejoice as a Democratic triumph?
It would not boa triumph which would
bring cheer to the hearts of freemen
Igroaning under the wrongs inaugurated
[by Greeley, and which will be sanctioned
|by his election.
It will be the same sort of triumph
Iwhioh Ex-Governor Brown achieved in
11867-68. It was a great personal tri
umph to him, but ono that brought no
[cheer to the hearts of the true Demo-
[cratsof Georgia.
We were then almost tabooed for not
[questioning the integrity of his motives,
| widely as we differed from him in policy,
[by many who are now so longing for u
|like triumph upon identically the same
[principles on which he acted.
So in the case of our friends, Lamar
land others, who have recently, for the
[purpose of "winning,”as they hope, fall-
|en into the line of Ex-Governor Brown.
| If they shall be as successful as he was,
we shall look npon their triumph just os
j we looked upon his. It will be ! ‘like the
mosio of Carry],” with mncli more of the
“mournful” than the "pleasant” in its
| emotional awakenings.
We say to our respeoted cotemporary,
[thatwe are not eager for supper—we
[have but little bodily appetite for meals
of any sort. The diet we now chiefly
indulge in, is thought. If, therefore, he
has any more questions to ask, we hope
he will feel no reluctance in propound
ing them. We will take much more
[pleasure in answering them if it takes all
might and next d*y, than in any enjoy-
[ment to be derived from breakfast, din
|ners, or supper. A. H. S.
SUN-STROKE.
The straight-outs Sony the insinuation that they
ire slrayet-ouls. and insist npon being caUed
"straight-outs.” Well, they are straight-outs—
' 'ght-ont fools.—An Exchange.
Well, this is quite a damaging oharge,
but not without some redeeming consid
“rations, according to Pat’s view of the
[subject.
He says it is worse to call a mtm a fool
I than a knave; because any one can "qnat’
|beiug a “knave,” while no one can
‘qnat” being a fooL Since, therefore,
[the "straights” cannot quit their folly of
adhering to their principles, it is to be
| hoped that the " crooked” may quit the
'knavery" of their coalition with Radi-
j cals, and then all will be right again.
| "Horace Greelet. — WocaII attention to the md
| vertiseniont of Barton’s Life of Mr. Greeley.
New York, August 25.—At a picnio of
printers, at Jones’ woods, yesterday,
[Greeley made a brief speech, in which
| there was no allusion to~politics; but the
|hopo was expressed that the printers
| would avail themselves of the advantages
‘of oo-operative labor.
Aii-pat:’ - sSat-uthat
31anton Duncan said he never had a
'aim of $52,000, nor a claim for a dollar
[and if he had, it couldn’t be collected as
| he was not pardoned, as a rebel until
[October, 18G6.
] Rev. Hugh S. Brown, a noted Baptist
|preacher, of Liverpool, arrived in the
[steamer Spain this morning, aud preach-
|ed to au immense audience in the Han-
[son Place Baptist Church, (Brooklyn,
[this evening. |( >
. er—< r v^_
Till the October Court, most of tho writer’s time
will be employed In his law studies, and he shall at
tempt very little in the way of editorial composi
tion. After that time, howover, he trusts to be able
to do all he can, in Ills way, to instruct, amuse or
entertain the reader of the Times and Planter.
One word ot explanation in regard to politics. Be-
lleving that no good can come of any opposition to
the nominees of the Cincinnati and Baltimore con
ventions, the undersigned shall not obtrude his
opinions on the subject upon the public. In suffer
ing his name, however, to stand under the Greeley
and Brown ticket, in the paper, he wishes it dis
tinctly understood that he reserves to himself the
right to remain away from the polls on election day,
should ho think fit, and in such manner suffer his
friends to decide tho matter In his stead. As an in
dividual, he has never been able to make choice be
tween Greeley and Grant. This, however, shall in
no wise affect the line of policy held by the paper;
and the undersigned mentions it only for the sake
of his peisonal consistency.
In relation to his vote in the Presi
dential election, we have but little doubt
that by the time for action in the prem
ises, he, and thousands of other true
Democrats in Georgia, who are qow
pondering the question of a choice be
tween the evils of Grant and Greeley,
will be entirely relieved of that difficul
ty. If they have no straight oat Jeffer
sonian ticket to vote for, they will at
least see that a vote for Greeley upon
the Radical Platform adopted at Balti
more, can effect no result so sure as
that of debasement and oonscious degra
dation which ever attends the doing of
what is felt to be wrong.
It will be fully demonstrated, we think,
long before November, that Mr. Greeley
stands no chance of »n election, and
that a vote cast for him by a Georgia
Democrat will be nothing but an igno
minious bowing of the knee to his Radi
cal principles.
It will be fully demonstrated, we think,
long before November, that the "ground
swell” of this foulest of all coalitions
ever attempted to he formed in this
country, will result in nothing but wreck
aud disaster to all Democrats who shall
unite their fortunes with it.
Our views of this coalition, its origifl,
nature and objects, as well as the designs
of its projectors, are well known to our
readers. It is but a culmination of
the "New Departure” of last year.
Its great leading purpose was either to
Radicalize or defeat the Democratic Par
ty. It may do the latter, but we are
deeply impressed with the conviction
that it can never do the former.
We cannot permit the indulgence of
the belief that the three millions and
upward of Democratio voters in the
United States can ever thus, by the craft
of treacherous leaders, be induced to
discard the faith of their Fathers. Such
an act would have no parallel in History.
The great apostacy of Julian is not so
infamous as this would be. We can bnt
believe that the high and noble mission
of the Democracy to rescue and save
Constitutional liberty on this Continent
will yet, under Providence, do by them
fulfilled.
This, however, can be done only by
their strict adherence to the principles,
upon which their sires, abandoning the
monarchies of the Old World, erected in
this Hemisphere those Democratic Insti
tutions which are now the light and hope
of mankind.
Are the sons equal to the trust com
mitted to them by their sires ? Under
Providence, we repeat, our convictions
are strong—our hope undying—that in
the end they will thus prove themselves
to be. A. H. S.
The Hurricane Shoals Property.
Manufacturers who desire to **stabb"*<h
themselves in Georgia will do well to
examine the great sale of real estate at
Jefferson, on the first Tuesday in No
vember, being lands belonging to the
estate of John Griffith, deceased. On
one of these tracts is the celebrated Hur
ricane Shoals—one of the finest water
powers in Georgia.
We, in turn, specially invite *he atten
tion of our neighbor, as well as that of
our readers, to our comments upon it.
1. In the first place then, we say to our
neighbor, that in all discussions, wheth
er political or of any other character,
where truth is the object, (as it should
be in all), it is essential to have a dis
tinct understanding, and a clear state
ment of the points in issue between tho
respective sides.
Now, what we said was, that there was
no essential difference in principles be
tween the platforms on which the two
Radical chiefs, Greeley and Grant, are
now running for the Presidency. This
is our position, as clearly stated. . Is it
true or not ? That is the great question,
for men of intelligence, who have any
regard to truth and principle, to decide.
It is to this class, in whose hands the des
tinies of our oountry now rest, we ap
peal.
2. The Constitution, in its assault upon,
our position,cautiously abstains from any
direct reference to either of these Plat
forms. • Now, if there is any essential or
material difference in principle between
them, so far as relates to Radicalism,
Centralism and Consolidation, it must
appear npon the face of the record; and
certainly is susceptible of being dis
tinctly pointed out. Has onr neighbor
ventured upon this impossible task ? We
affirm that he has not, and his article
shows that onr affirmance is true.
8. Instead of taking up the Platforms
aud showing any essential difference in
principle between them, the CTonslilution,
after the manner of his great ■exemplar—
whose object was "to make the worse ap
pear the better” side—leaves the Plat
forms, the real question in hand, un
touched,* and goes off with the address of
the Cincinnati Convention, and what it
says against Grant, and also what Mr.
Beck said on the same line.
It is to these sayings of others he asks
our attention, when it was to what the
Conventions had done, and not to what
thQir Committee or any stump speaker
had said, we had called puolic attention.
What the honest masses of the people,
whose liberties are at stake, are concern
ed in knowing, is the solemn and well
matured declaration of principles, put
forth by these respective wings of the
Radical Party, and not what any body
may say about them. These principles,
so set forth, constitnte the organic law
of the party announcing them. They
constitute the title deeds under which
they^come into power, if they be affirmed
and sanctioned by the people.
It was to the words of these title
deeds we referred, when we said and
again repeat, there is no essential differ
ence in principle between them
We had seen and noted all that onr
neighbor has called our attention to;
and a great deal more of equally irrele
vant stuff of the same character. When
an estate depends upon the words of the
will or the title deeds, all parties at in
terest should look well to the words of
the instrument, and not to what even the
sorivener says about them.
We are dealing now, not with the
opinions of scriveners or the arguments
of pettifoggers, whose highest aim is sue
cess, and not the maintenance of right.
We call upon our neighbor to take up
those Platforms as they stand npon the
record, and show if be can, any essential
difference between them so far as relates
to their Radical doctrines and tendencies.
We engaged in this contest with no
motive or object whatever but the main
tenance of truth and the preservation of
those principles on which alone the lib
erties of this country can be perpetuated.
We know there are many who believe
that all politics are a sliam—that Platforms
are but the tricks and contrivances of
demagogues to cheat the people and
gain power. We need not assure our
readers that we do not belong to this
class. In politics, as in religion, we be
lieve there is a great deal of sham—a
vast deal of cratt, cunning, trickery and
treachery ; but, nevertheless, eternal
truths form the foundation of both, and
to Democrats just now no words are more
appropriate than those of Him who spake
as man never spake:
"Beware of false prophets which
“ come to yon in sheep’s clothing, but
“inwardly are ravening wolves
“ Ye shall know them by their fruits,
"Do men gather grapes of tht~_
"of thistles ?”
We judge of the Radical Cincinnati
Convention by its fruits—by its deeds—by
its record.
Can any men be so easily gulled as to
expect or hope ‘to gather Democratic
grapes from these Radical “thorns,” or
Democratio figs from these Radios'
If so, we, by way of retort
upon our neighbor, who so broadly ar
raigns onr Democracy, say to him, “ we
have a poor opinion of their intelligence;
and if they wilfully ignore” the facts,
"they must settle the account with their
conscience.”
4. A few words now, in addition to what
we have said upon the extracts to which
onr neighbor called our attention.
We have already stated that these, at
best, are but the words of the scrivener
and the advocate; and can have no force
or authority on the points at issue in
this discussion.
But in conclusion, we have some ques
tions to propose to all enquirers after
truth in this matter. If the Cincinnati
Convention had intended to arraign the
Radical Party before the country for its
gross and palpable usurpations of Power,
as the address would seem to tmply, why
did they not do so in their public mani
festo of principles? Why did they in their
platform—the title deed under which they
seek to come into power, affirm all these
nsnrpations*sp alluded to in the ad
dress ? Why talk one way and act another?
Is not this of itself evidence that they
are but "wolves in sheep’s clothing ?”—
Are they not coming to us for our “birth
right” with Esau’s hands, but Jacob’s
voice ?
Again: how can Mr. Beck, or any
other reasonable man, expect Mr. Greeley
to condemn these usurpations when he
was among the most distinguished
authors of them, and now defends, sanc
tions, and approves every one of them
to the spirit and letter ?
Our neighbor has repeatedly of late
said in substance , that Mr. Greeley has
quit the Party of Usurpers, and has
come over to the Democratic side of op
position to them. We call for. the proof.
We wish to deal justly and fairly towards
Mr. Greeley, as we wish to do towards
all men. We do not oppose him on per
sonal grounds. He has many qualities
we admire, and none more than his un
swerving devotion to his political princi
pies and convictions.
As we understand him, he now stands
upon his record. That record shows him
to be the master spirit uf all the ills un
der which the country now chiefly groans.
There is not a single one of the acts of
usurpation, referred to by the address
our neighbor cite3, which Mr. Greeley
did not approve, nor a single one of
them that Mr. Greeley has ever to this
day, that we are aware of, condemned.
A. H. S.
Perhaps our neighbor will see that the
dum and the dee of this business, is not
exactly the same; and that the end will
prove to be far different from what was
expected by its projectors. A. H. S.
A QUESTION* UNANSWERED.
Who Are Factious J
Several days ago we propounded to our
neighbor, who is. charging The Sun with
pursuing a factious coarse, in refusing
to be bound by the action of the so-called
"constituted authorities” of the Demo
cratic party, in the matter of the nomi-
notion of Mr. Greeley, a very plain
question, in these words:
'If our neighbor does not feel bound to subscribe
to the action of what he calls the -‘constituted au
thorities” of the party at Baltimore in the matter of
principles announced, with what authority does he
assume to say that we, or other Damocrata In Geor
gia. are bound by what was done either there or in
Atlanta in the matter of candidates, when the man
presented to them ha* been the life-long enemy to
every essential principle in the Democratio creed,
and who would now, according to his solemn decla
ration, retire from the contest aud vote for General
Grant, if it were necessary to defeat the elsotion of
a Democrat?’*
This question has not yet been an
swered; and yet onr neighbor still has
the face to arraign Thg Sun for refusing
to recognize any obligation on its part,
or that of true Democrats anywhere, to
hoist the Greeley flag, or vote the Gree
ley ticket, barely because the Baltimore
and Atlanta Oonvontions have presented
his name!
Has not the entire Democracy of Geor
gia, "Grookeds” as well as "Straights,”
repudiated the principles announced at
Baltimore by the so-called, "constituted
authorities” of the party there assem
bled?
Are .not those principles so announced
bj^iyh&t he styles the constituted au
thorities of his party, openly repudiated
by outneighbor? Is his repudiation of
the principles on which Mr. .Greeley is
run, and npon which he is to administer
the Government if elected, less factious
than our repudiation of the candidate
who is thus to administer it? Why is
the Constitution now so mum? Is this
too, a case of bare "tweedledee and
tweedledum ?” A, H. S.
Tweedledum Aim Tweedledee.—It must not
escape notice that the resolutions of the Democratio
State Convention that the “ straights” revolt from,
are identical in substance with those adopted by the
“ straights,” save as to the one about Greeley. They
were principally the work of the late Judge Linton
Stephens, while those of the “ straights” were by
Mr. A. H. Stephens.
This fact shows how factions and groundless and
needless is the “ straight” movement as one to pre
serve principle.—Atlanta Constitution.
Yes, the Platforms are the same, "save"
the Resolution of the Greeleyites com
mitting the Democracy of Georgia to
the support of a Radical candidate for
the Presidency.
The "Straights” reaffirm and stand by
the principles of the Democracy of Geor*-
gia, and repudiate the Cincinnati stand
ard-bearer, while the Greeleyites profess
Democratic principles, but go into the
Radical camp for standard-bearers to
carry them out.
This is the difference between * ‘tweedle'
dum and tweedledee,” is it?^,This re
fusal to follow the Greeleyites in turning
the Democracy of Georgia over to Radi
cal hands, is nothing but “a factious and
needless” movement, is it?
The end will show who constitute the
faction and who the True Democracy of
the State.
We were anxious for harmony in the
party. We earnestly implored it. After
the general demoralization produced by
the great blunder or crime (be it which it
may) at Baltimore, we urged the leaders
of the Greeleyite Convention at Atlanta
not to attempt to force theLaltimorenom
inee upon the Democracy of Georgia, but
simply to nominate good Democratic
electors, and leave it with them to cast
the vote of the State as they might
deem wise at the time of the meeting
of the colleges. We feltlj perfectly as
sured that by the time of the meeting of
the colleges it would be well known that
the election would not depend upon the
rote of Georgia, and that there, would
be no necessity whatever of.^our j people
making any choicejbetween the {evils of
Grant and Greeley.
Could a fairer or better proposition
have been made for the preservation of
the harmony, unity and fintegrity of the
Party in Georgia ?
Why was it not acceded to ? Was ever
a more “needless” affroD* offered, fmn
to allies, than was given to the
“St?aight3’’ by the Greeleyites in their
Resolution tnua attempting to ‘*mtch
on” the Democracy of the State ’ k to the
ear of Radicalism ?
Was not this movement a most faction s
as well as needless one ?
This, however, is all nothing but the
difference between "tweedledum ;&nd
tweedledee—is it ?
“The Oround-Sweil.”
The, reports by telegraph :rom the
election in West Virginia, which was
held on the 22d inst., indioate that
Jacob, the "Straight-out” Democrat,
i has carried the State against Camden,
^ bis Greeleyite competitor, by a hand
some majority.
It seems, after all, that it was not sa
"infernal foolish” on the part of the
True Democrats of this portion of the
Old Dominion to persist iu adhering to
their integrity, and iu refusing to bow
tho Knee to the Baal of Radicalism, that
"thrift might follow fawning.”
Had the same policy been pursued in
North Carolina, that State might now
hold the same proud position sue gained
in 1870.
*-•-«
Great Ileal stale iu Jackion and
Madlton CouatUn,
We call attention to the great sales of
Rial Estate at Jefferson, iu Jackson
coauty, Gi., oa the first Tuesday in
November, aud at Danielsville, Madison
couaty, on tae first Tuesday in December,
as advertise! iu our paper by the Exeou-
tors of John Griffith, deceased, late of
Jacksou county. These sales are im
portant, at which a very large quantity
of very valuable lauds will be disposed
of to the highest bidder.
Oa oue tract of laud to be sold iu Jef
ferson, first Puosday in Novemoer, are
the far-famed Hurricane Shoals—a very
superior water power—oue of the moat
valuable iu the South. Read the adver
tisement.
SUN STROKES.
Wo gave yesterday the difference between Greeley
and Grant, from a Democratic standpoint.
To-day we give the difference from a Radical
standpoint. It completes the picture.—Atlanta Con
stitution.
Now please give the difference from
their respective platform standpoints.
This is a feature in the picture iu which
the people have most interest. But
even this will not render iff complete,
for ane of the most striking differences
between the two chiefs is, that Grant
got his Radicalism mostly from Greeley.
Greeley was, the c&Jv'Taator, while
Grant is the executioner of all the usur
pations, which now so severely afflict the
country.
Let us have a perfect picture before it
is done with.
“With what face does our neighbor venture to ad
dress the Democracy of Gesrgia, or of the United
States, in censure of us, with its complaints of the
people ‘groaning under Radical Despotism,* when it
carries at the head of its columns, as its candidate,
the name of Horace Greeley, the master spirit in
bringing about that despotism under which they
groan.”—Atlanta, Sun.
‘The simple answer is that Horace
Greeley is pledged to remove that ‘Des
potism,’ and that he is the regularly nom
inated Democratic candidate for Presi
dent.”—Atlanta Constitution.
The answer is simple enough, short
enough and pointed enough ; bnt is it
true that Horace Greeley is pledged to
remove the Despotism'under which the
people of the country groan ? What is
that Despotism but the Reconstruction
usurpations, with {the Enforcement and
Ku-Klux acts. f
Was not Horace Greeley ,the zealous
and able supporter of all these measures
of Despotism? Is he not the supporter of
them now to the letter and spirit? When
or where has he ever pledged himself to
remove a single one of {them? Let us
hear further from you, Jneighbor, upon
this point.
Democrats, to the tzovAt—Atlanta\Conititution.
Not under the banner of Greeley.—
There is no music in the “sound of that
slogan” for those who drove Bullock and
his "robber crowd” from Georgia.
They recollect too Jweli how Greeley
backed Bollock in his attempts to get
Grant to sustain him in],his]outrages by
outlawing the 5th Congressional District
aid patting it under military rale.
They recollect too well how hejrefused
even a hearing to the Diatrictjthrough
the columns of the lribune {in answer
to Bullock’s groundless assertions.
The only slogan whickjwill bring true
Democrats to the front is, “Down with
Radicalism and every one upon (Radical
Platforms.”
I do not think it is true that the Louisville Con
vention means to nominate Andrew Jackson for
President.—Atlanta Correspondent Angus'a Constitu-
he-’'*.
Is it not a little strange’that t.hia news
reporter should have intimated a doubt
on this point, after having vouched for
so many other incredible tilings about
the late Convention of “Straight-outs”
iu this city ?
Bangor, Mb., August 26.—Mary De
Sales, Mother Superior of St. Xavier’s
Convent, is dead. f i
From Atlanta Constitution, 2l8t August, 1872.
The Difference Between Greeley and -
Grant.
The Sun of this morning has numer
ous articles contending that there is no
difference between Greeley and Grant.
One article is from “A. H. S.” We an
swer them all at onoe, And we let the
parties speak for themselves.
The difference is well stated in the ad
dress of the Cincinnati Convention that
nominated Greeley. We give it entire
and call Mr. Stephens’ attention to it.
"Xhk Addbess. — Ths Admiuistratiou now i&
pawer has rendered itsslf guilty of a wanton disre
gard of the laws of the and, and of usurping powers
not granted by the Constitution. It has acted as it
the laws had binding force only for those who are
governed, and not for those wno govern. It has
struck a blow at the fundamental principles of consti
tutional government and the liberties of citizens. The
President of the United Statoa openly uses the pow
ers and opportunities of his high office for the. pro
motion of personal ends; he Las kept notoriously
corrupt ana unworthy men In place* of p^wer and
responsibility, to the detriment of the public inter- ■
ests; ho haa uaed the public service of the govern
ment as a machinery of partisan and personal influ
ence. and interfered with tyrannical arrogance in the
political affairs of Stales and municipalities; he hM
rewarded with influential aud lucrative otliocs men
Who had acquired hia favor by vaiuaule presents,
thus stimulating the demoralization of our political
life by hiscoaspiouom example; he has enoivn him
self deplorably unequal to the risk imposed upon
him by the necessities of the country aud culpably
careless of the responsibilities of hi,h office.
The partisans - f the administration, claiming to
be tho Republican party, aud controlling its organi-
tion, have attempted to justify such wrong and pal
liate such abuses to the end of maintaining such
partizan ascendancy. They have stood in i he way
of necessary investigations aud indispensable re
forms, pretending th.t no serious fault could be
found with the present administration of public af
fairs, thus seeking to bltud tho eyes 01 the people.—
They have kept alive the pas-ions and resentments
of the late civil war to use them to their own ad
vantages. They have resorted to arbitrary measures
in direct conflict with organic law, instead of ap
pealing to the better instincts of the latent patriot
ism of the Southern people, restoring to them those
rights the enjoyment ol which is indispensable
for the successful admiuistratiou of their
local affairs, aud would tend to a more patriotic
and hopeful national feeling. They have degraded
themselves and the name of their party, once justly
entitled to the confidence of the nation, by a base
sycophancy to the dispenser of executive powers
unworthy of Republican freemen; they have sought
to stifle the voice t.Tjust criticism, to stifle the moral
sense of the people, aud to subjugate public opinion
by tyrannical party discipline; they are striving to
maintain themsslve* in authority for selfish ends by
an unscrupulous use of power which rightfully be
longs to the people, and should bo employed only
in tho.servicu of the country. Believing that an or
ganization thus led aud controlled can no longer bs
of service to the beBt interests of the Republic, we
have resolved to make an independent appeal to the
sober judgment, conscience and patriotism of the
American seOPl#t2 \J§
This is tne arraignment of Grant by
Greeley and bis Republicans.
Comment is needless. If gentlemen
can see no difference between the man
and his party arraigned above and those -
arraigning them, we have poor opinion
of their intelligence, and if they wilful
ly ignore the difference, they must settle
the account with their consciences.
In conclusion, we cannot better put the
difference between Greeley and Grant
than in the words of that noble Demo
cratic Kentuckian, Mr. Beck:
What we may reasonably expect to accomplish by
the election of Greeley is thus stated by Judge
Black, of Pennsylvania, perhaps tho ablest man in
the Democratic party. I fuUy indorse what h j says:
“ I devoutly believe that, if chosen President, he
will keep his'oath, preserve the Constitution invio
late, execute the laws faithfully, restore the States to
their rightful autonomy, protect individual jury
trial anu hahtaa corpus, put tho military in proper
subordination to the civU authority, use neither
force not fraud to carry elections, keep his hands
clean from corrupting gifts, set his lacelikeaflint
against ah manner of financial dishonesty, purify
the administration ofiusti.ee as much as in him lies,
maintain the pubUc credit by a prompt discharge of
all just obligations, economise the revenuo and
lighten taxation, give to capital the right which be
longs to it, at the same time see that labor is not
robbed of its earnings. He will certainly hold his
power of app ointments as a public trust, and uot as
a part of hiB personal possession, to be used for the
support of his family, or to encourage the private
liberality of his friends. He will, so far as ho can
without transgressing the limits of his legal author
ity, relieve the Southern States from the gangs that
are now preying upon their vitals in open partner
ship with the present Administration.”
What may be reasonably expected as the result of
General Grant’s re-election will be easily understood
by ascertaining what he has done, as he, in his letter
of a .ceptance, distinctly avows his determination to
“fight it oat on that Une,” and consummate the
system he has inaugurated. What that a vstem is
the leader* of the Republicau party tell us very
clearly in the Cincinnati address. The leading
features of his policy, as therein stated, may be
briefly summed up thus: He will continue to dis
regard the laws ot the land, and usurp powers not
granted by the Constitution, He will use thepowsra
and opportunities of his high office for the promo
tion of personal ends. He will retain notoriously
corrupt men in power and use the public service for
corrnpt purposes. He will reward, with lucrative
offices, men wno make him variable presents. He
will interfere, with tyrannical arrogance, in the po
litical affairs of States and municipalities, thus
striking a blow at the fundamentals principles ot
constitutional government and the liberties of the
citizen. While m» partisan! will justify all these
wrongs and abuses, stifling necessary investigations
and reforms, keeping alive for their own advantage,
and fanning into flames tho passions Bud resent
ments of the late civil war, they will continue to de
grade themselves by a base sycophancy to the Presi
dent, silence the voice of criticism, stifle the moral
sense of the people, and subjugate public opiuionby
tyrannical party disciple for selfish and unprincipled
personal ends. It requires no “appeal to the sober
judgment, conscience and patriotism of the
American people” to enable them to determine
assu^Hou government and which ma» they
will select to exeente it by their votes next Novem
ber. Al!, regardless of party politics, who
desire to be free, and to hand down to posterity ?ur
present system of constitutional governme^. —a gov
ernment “for the people—by the people”—will vote
to fret, the places they have dishonored, a a.
the trusts they have violated, the leaders and mtia
gers of the present AdmmDtntlon. All who be.
lleve that constitutional government is a failure, and
that the present leaders are proper persons to n
age the personal despotic government^ which 1
seek to substitute for it, will vote for ' :
Haviug unshaken faith in the hor
intelligence of the American peo
orward to the elect.on of Gre
ha moat assured confidence.