New National Era

The Democratic Leaders Again,

Our remarks recently made on the bearing of the Democratic leaders toward the Tammany Ring, in the days of its power, were not designed merely to revive old quarrels, or to recall the course of this journal in that great struggle. The latter must be engraven in the memory of this people as long as honest men shall survive or there are similar abuses to reform. We have no occasion to remind the community of it. Nor have we any interest in the squabbles of the Democrats among themselves. Whether "Apollo Hall" goes down, or "Tammany" goes up, is the same thing to us. We have our own private opinion that, when an organization like Tammany has its name almost identified with swindling, and when its history has been mainly either of petty disreputable politics, or of public and notorious thievery, an honest man who happened to be a Democrat would be disgusted at having part or parcel with it, and would hasten to be forever rid of it and its traditions and surroundings.

But this is a matter of taste. Gentlemen usually do not care to join a club which has been managed and carried on by swindlers. If our Democratic gentlemen, either believing that they can purify this nest of thieves or caring more for political connection than for an honest man's self-respect, choose to become members of this disreputable organization, it is no affair of ours. Primarily, it is difficult for us to understand how any New York citizen who had the smallest sympathy with reform, or with the moral ideas of the age, could belong to a party which has not a single idea remaining, which has not only never effected a single political improvement, but has been stained and pervaded with corruption. And further than that, how a public man who believed in something higher than office-hunting and low party manoeuvring, and above all, who was aiming and laboring to elevate the working-classes, could voluntarily join such a corrupt and disreputable association as Tammany has been, remains for us something utterly incomprehensible.

But all this was not in our minds when we spoke of the position of the Democratic leaders in the great struggle with Tammany. In the recent political campaign we observed in the speeches of Mr. Hewitt, Mr. Tilden, and other Democratic leaders, and we note continually in the crazy columns of the World, an effort to warp the popular judgment on the conduct of these gentlemen during the struggle, and an attempt to make our good-natured community forget what the old chiefs of the Democracy might have done and what they really did in that great crisis. These gentlemen understand well the popular temperament. They know that our great weakness in America is to too easily forget and forgive. They trust to this good nature, and then by incessant repetitions of fallacies—which, perhaps, they half believe themselves—they hope eventually to entirely reverse the popular judgment on the Democratic party in New York.

So far as is in our power, we propose to defeat this amiable design. We believe that it is in the interest of public justice and morality, that our young men should know, and not forget, that in the most terrible struggle with organized corruption ever occurred in this country, when power and policy and fame, were on the side of public dishonesty and abuse, and loss and danger on the side of its assailants, the old Democratic chieftains never lifted a finger in the contest, and even gave their moral support to the successful swindlers. For it must be remembered, that in that long year of our battle with the Ring, a public word from Mr. Tilden, or any other of these gentlemen, would have been worth a thousand speeches from our Republican leaders, or all the articles that appeared in Republican journals. They were reputed gentlemen—men of honor, with large property interests at stake, and the well-known representatives of the Democracy. The public, especially the rural Democracy and the Democracy of other States, looked to them to rebuff these strange attacks on the party leaders of the city, or, if that could not be done, to humbly confess their truth, and to proclaim the utter separation of the Democratic party from these swindlers. Not a word ever escaped them. Mr. Tilden appeared at the head of the “Tweed Convention," and, if we mistake not, Mr. Clarkson N. Potter presided in a sitting which had not the courage either to condemn Tweed or his acts.

This was even after the public exposure. But before this, so hopelessly corrupt had the party become, that the stolen money of the Ring controlled all the Democratic primaries of the rural districts, and its influence was beginning to be felt throughout the whole country. During that year, when we struck our blows alone, Tweed and Sweeny controlled the Democratic party of the Union; they confidently expected to name the next President, and all that Democratic triumph could offer was in their hands. During that very year, few intelligent men in New York doubted the evidence and the suspicious indications we brought forward as to the corruption of the Ring.

And yet, during that very period, no Democratic leader made a sign of opposition or suspicion of this corrupt gang. On the contrary, the names of several appeared on the list of munificent donors of princely gifts to a member of the family of the leader, thus testifying their social respect for the man. It is true, as Mr. Hewitt said in his recent letter, that, privately and confidentially, the Democratic leaders doubted and denounced the members of the Ring. But they kept all this holy indignation for their families, or for the clubs, where everybody agreed with them. No syllable of it was lisped in public. We cannot, however, agree with Mr. Hewitt that to Mr. Tilden is due the credit of proving charges vaguely made. We acknowledge that when the whole public were in full cry against the rogues, Mr. Tilden joined the hunt. We freely admit, further, the claims upon public gratitude which Mr. Tilden established by his investigation into the accounts of the Broadway Bank, by his service freely given to the conduct of the civil suits against the Ring, and by his self-sacrificing efforts to bring the corrupt judges to justice. But the publishing of the accounts and the fraudulent vouchers was the great proof to the public of the guilt and rottenness of Tammany; and the succeeding demonstration in figures by the committee of citizens, of which Mr. William A. Booth was the able chairman, formed the official and exact verifying of what the first publication clearly showed.

On the whole, the wise and humble part for the Democratic leaders is, either never to allude to the Ring frauds, or humbly to confess that, in the darkest hour of municipal corruption, they failed in their duty, and had not the courage or the genius to say in public what in their hearts they believed.—N. Y. Times.