misrule and achieving their freedom, they will be safe thenceforth from any harm not of their own home-brewing."-The Courant (Rep.), Hartford. Our Right of Intervention.-"Intervention [to induce Spain to recognize independence] is clearly within our rights, both legal and moral, and whether or not it shall be undertaken is purely a question of expediency. It is a matter to be gone about with great caution and with full knowledge of the facts and conditions in Cuba, and is therefore only a matter for the Executive, which alone has the necessary information to guide action. Congress has done all it can when it has expressed its sense of what the policy of the Executive should be, for it is very doubtful if its recognition of Cuban belligerency has any binding force on our Government. Precedent and custom have practically settled that all such matters are in the hands of the Executive, and Congress has never before acted independently of the President in declaring our relations to foreign powers."- The Republican (Ind.),Springfield. The Resolutions Are Premature.-"One of our contemporaries, the New York Evening Post, takes the ground, and with much force, that the question of according belligerent rights to the Cubans is not for Congress, but for the President to decide. As to this, this journal remarks: "An unbroken line of precedents from the foundation of the Goyernment supports this view. The events of each day show that even if it were not the practice of our Government to leave this matter to the Executive, it would be the part of wisdom for Congress to keep its hands off it. It is, therefore, in the highest degree expedient that the President, who has the necessary information in 'his possession, should be the person to say whether any belligerent is an organization with which we can communicate freely, and can call to account for wrong-doing with hope for redress." "This country does not wish to go out of its way to foment war with Spain or any other power. While the sympathy of every American is wholly with Cuba, and a desire for the success of the insurgents is the controlling feeling of our people, wiser, more deliberate and more moderate counsels should be exhausted in behalf of Cuba before a cause for war is given to Spain. A question of such gravity as the recognition not only of Cuban belligerency, but of Cuban independence, is not to be settled with precipitate haste and without full consideration of possibilities affecting the interests of our own country, to which we owe the paramount duty."-The Ledger (Ind. Rep.), Philadelphia. Effect of the Resolutions.-"The recognition of the Cuban patriots as belligerents will have the effect of a notification to General Weyler that his policy of treating his opponents as bandits will be regarded with marked disfavor by the United States. It will have the further effect of making an open market in the United States for the sale of provisions and munitions of war to the Cubans on precisely the same terms as to the Spaniards. The United States, as a neutral nation, can sell arms and food to either of the belligerent forces, tho it can not permit the fitting out of armed expeditions in favor of either. In plain language, each belligerent will be free to buy what it needs from the United States, and to run the risk of its purchases being captured by the enemy as soon as they are afloat beyond the three-mile limit. "The articles of war of all civilized nations are in agreement as to the treatment of prisoners; in no case is the death or cruel treatment of a prisoner of war justified. If Spain insists upon shooting the captured Cubans as tho they were bandits after their belligerent status has been recognized by the United States, such barbarity may hasten that armed interference at which the joint resolutions hint."-The Inter Ocean (Rep.), Chicago. "Sooner or later the United States undoubtedly will come to the succor of Cuba. In what form succor can most wisely be undertaken is a question not to be impetuously or ignorantly answered. The form adopted ought not to involve wholly needless sacrifice of American rights and interests. But Spain, on the other hand, should not be left in doubt as to the substantial and resolute purpose of the people of the United States to put an end to oppression and inhumanity in Cuba."-The Times-Herald (Ind.), Chicago. Cabled Foreign Comments. The Prime Minister's Opinion.-Prime Minister Canova del Castillo is thus quoted in press despatches of March 1: "I trust that President Cleveland will veto the formal resolution of Congress, and I have more reason to trust that he will not comply with the recommendations contained therein." "The granting of belligerent rights to the Cuban rebels is not a casus belli, but Spain will declare that it is not the act of a friendly nation. I do not think that Spain is threatened by foreign aggression, but measures shall be taken for the defense of Spanish rights, chiefly in Cuba. As regards demonstrations in the streets here, I shall repress them severely if they are attempted." Threats of Privateering.—“If matters reach the conclusion the Americans desire, the whole of Spain will rise against the United States. Neither in the Mediterranean, whose entrance we command, nor on the Atlantic, will a single American ship be safe, for we shall organize privateers on a large scale. We must not make a noisy demonstration like the Portuguese at the time of their dispute with Great Britain. We conquered Napoleon by a system of guerilla warfare, and we shall establish a system of privateers that will conquer a mercantile nation on the seas. The Americans are wrong to judge Spain by her finances. There are considerations superior to the revenues of the country."-Imparcial, Madrid. The Flexible Monroe Doctrine.-"For a country which fought a stupendous war to suppress a revolt of its own citizens, the Senate's action goes very far indeed. The sacred right of any State to maintain its own unity and to suppress its own rebels without foreign intervention was what the North valiantly poured out its blood and dollars for. But it seems that European governments having subjects and territories in the neighborhood of the American continent have no rights. The Cubans, no doubt, have not been well governed, and suffer much from an administration which is often lax and not too honest. But if the United States arrogates the right to upset every government not administered according to its ideals as understood in the rule of public affairs, Washington and New York will have a great deal to do, and they might begin by reforming Venezuela. The Monroe doctrine is of uncommon flexibility to adaptation, and it may say 'hands off' to all Europe and 'hands on' for the United States where the transmarine possessions of a European power are concerned. This principle is applicable to Cuba, which is not part of the American continent, to-day. Why not to Fiji, Manila, and New Zealand to-morrow?""-St. James's Gazette, London. THE SALVATION ARMY LOSES BALLINGTON BOOTH AND HIS WIFE. “I HERE declare, on Mrs. Booth's and my own behalf, that we can not under any conditions whatsoever accept proposals from London, nor enter again under the authority or government of International Headquarters in England." With this declaration in writing, Commander Ballington Booth, of the Salvation Army of the United States, steps down and out. This action is the result of the recent order issued by General Booth for the Commander and his wife to say farewell to America. The steps by which this result was reached are not as yet made perfectly clear to the public. It appears that Ballington Booth sent ́a letter of protest to the General (his father) in the latter part of January, coupling with it, apparently, a conditional resignation. Charges seem to have been made in it against the General's administration. Following this, the Commander was called to London at once, one reason assigned being the necessity of investigating these charges. The Commander insisted upon certain conditions before obeying the call. One was that his brother, Herbert Booth, commander of the forces in Canada, should not reenter this country during his (Ballington's) absence. Another was that his wife should remain in charge in this country in the mean time. Another was that he should be detained but a week and then should return to America. The conditions were not granted. Commissioner Eva Booth (a sister of Ballington), Herbert Booth and Colonel Nicoll (editor of the Army publica tions), were despatched to New York, and, on the repeated refusal of Ballington Booth to go to London unless his conditions were granted, peremptorily demanded that he retire from com mand at once and turn over the keys of headquarters. This was construed by the Commander as a dismissal. He complied with both demands, but did not turn over the property of the Army, which is vested in his name. Commissioner Booth-Tucker and his wife have been ordered from India to assume command of the Army here, Commissioner Eva Booth remaining in temporary command until their arrival. The reasons for Ballington Booth's course of action in resisting an order which, it is claimed, is in conformity with the well of the Army and its formation into an independent body seemed at one time imminent, if Ballington and his wife had spoken the word. This he refused to do. But he has since announced that he and Mrs. Booth will undertake the organization of an independent movement in this country not antagonistic to the army. The interest in the trouble is general, as manifested both in secular and religious journals. The American Sorrow.-"I believe that every thoughtful man will rejoice that in the presence of so great a trial the General Copyright, 1895, Rockwood Photographs. 1. General William Booth. 2. Ballington Booth. 3. Mrs. Ballington Booth. F. de Latour Booth-Tucker. 5. 6. W. Bramwell Booth. PROMINENT MEMBERS OF THE BOOTH FAMILY. established policy of the Army, twenty-one other commanders and commissioners in various parts of the world receiving similar orders at the same time, are stated by him as "conscientious feelings and private reasons well known to the General." Nothing more explicit, it is said by his friends, may be expected, since to be more explicit would involve reflections upon his father, which Ballington refrains from. A secession of the American auxiliary "Every one will see that it would be gravely and immediately destructive of all confidence in the whole administration of the Army if it could appear as tho to be his son privileged any man, on that account, to obtain or retain more agreeable positions than other men no less devoted could attain. All faith in the General would be gone and the Army itself would be destroyed by such a violation of the universal sense of justice."-Bramwell Booth, in the London War Cry. Stand by the Flag.-"The contingency which has arisen in the ranks should be regarded as an opportunity-one of a deplorable nature, it is true, to the Salvationist to stand by the principles he has espoused and the flag to which he has sworn allegiance. Feelings and emotions are our common heritage, and at such times are apt to assert themselves to the offsetting and overbalancing of sound, sober judgment. This, on the present occasion, should-nay, must-be avoided. Tender feelings must be suppressed and emotional fountains closed as well as may be. Principle, as we understand it, must be adhered to, and all that is good and loyal and true in our Salvationism assert itself. "The cynical world may misjudge, but our own people should not find occasion for so doing. The Salvation Army is not of man, but of God; it will, therefore, breast every wave of difficulty, as it has in the past. The present contingency may give it a temporary set-back in this country, but eventually will only prove the crucible out of which the gold in our organization will come thrice purified. "God still lives! The flag still waves! Righteousness will triumph! Hallelujah!"-The War Cry, New York. Only Success will Justify the Rebellion.-“Rev. Dr. Josiah Strong, one of Ballington Booth's supporters, says: 'If a system demands the removal of a man who has found his best sphere of service, no matter how much the cause may suffer thereby, then the system is a poor one and should be revised.' We quote this because it approaches the core of the issue. Ballington Booth's insubordination can be defended only on the ground that the military system is fundamentally wrong and that he, personally, is of more consequence to the work in America than that system. His rebellion will be justified only as all rebellions are-by success. He must show that the military system under which this organization has grown to enormous size, is radically at fault, by doing the same work under a different method. We trust that, having attacked that system by his refusal to obey the orders of his superior officer, he will make the attempt. We should then see worked out an interesting problem, as well as have more convincing evidence that Ballington Booth's recent action was not due to personal feelings."-The Republican, Springfield, Mass. A Severe Blow.-"Loyalty doubtless requires that all the members of the Salvation Army should accept with unquestioning obedience the orders of their Commander-in-Chief, but it does not require that the general public should do so, and it must be frankly said that this recall has administered a severe blow to the public confidence which Commander and Mrs. Booth had won for the Salvation Army, by their consecrated zeal and practical wisdom. That confidence may be secured by the successor of Commander and Mrs. Booth. It will be easier for him to secure it than it was for them when they took command in this country ten years ago. But he will have to secure it by his administration; it will not be given to him as of course. For that confidence, so far as this country is concerned, has been largely personal confidence in the Commanders rather than in the organization, whose principle of autocracy does not commend itself to the American habit of mind."- The Outlook (Rel.), New York. The Army Outgrows English Control.-"In the American branch there are now more than 2, 100 of those officers and over 650 corps or societies, or more than in any other country except England itself. Evidently, General Booth looks forward to the more rapid progress of the Salvation Army here than anywhere else, and he is especially anxious to keep this American branch under his domination. Because of the confidence secured by Mr. and Mrs. Ballington Booth it has commanded liberal support from Protestant wealth, and more than in any other country it has enjoyed the favor of the Protestant community. The old ridicule and distrust of it have given place to respectful consideration; and thus both morally and materially the Army has progressed and increased so far that inevitably it will soon outgrow English control, unless General Booth can now succeed in subjecting it to his military authority."— The Sun, New York. The Organization Needs Change. "It is unnecessary to wait for further light to see that in one respect the present organization needs change. We refer to the provision, or lack of it, for holding property designed to promote the cause of the Salvationists. It would seem that the title to the property in New York city is in the name of Ballington Booth. The reasonable supposition is that all the property of the Army is held in the same personal way. There was a time when no better plan could be adopted, but the corporate system now obtains and is the only system adapted to permanent trusts. . . . The one-family policy is fraught with danger, and can not be too soon superseded by a system more accordant with the modern methods and ideas."The Inter Ocean, Chicago. ‘Organization involves obedience, for without obedience organization is impossible. Into the thoroughly efficient but unfortu nately non-permanent organization known as the Salvation Army, insubordination has entered, and we may look for the beginning of the end. The Commander of the Army in this country indulged himself, defied authority, thought more of the things of this world than of the reward which he had pictured to himself in another, and, refusing obedience to the central authority, leaves an organization which his conduct will decidedly demoralize.”— The Chronicle, Chicago. "The crisis for the Army is a most precarious one, for the Army still lacks, with all its force, the one feeder of loyalty which makes the Roman Catholic Church irrefragable. The Catholics recruit from the cradle; Methodism and the Salvation Army recruit from the adult world. The old church manufactures its loyalists out of the rawest of material; Protestant absolutism begins its process of manufacture only after the world, the flesh, and the devil have done their own work on the material. The odds are against the Army, just as they have always been against all other attempts to create a Protestant despotism."-The News, Detroit. "It is unnecessary to go into consideration of the internal dissensions which have brought about his change. The pretense of 'military discipline' is an absurdity, and the affectation of autocracy by 'General' Booth, while recognized by the 'Army' in accordance with the conditions of their association, must seem to all outsiders ridiculously childish. But the result is to be lamented; for the work of the Salvation Army under the Booths has been brought to a high state of efficiency in this country, and it can only be a detriment to depose these recognized leaders, who have become American citizens, and substitute foreigners.”—The Post, Boston. "No one can accuse Commander Booth of ever having shown symptoms of a swollen head, or of any attempt to outdo his father. This recent rebellion against the paternal authority is the first that can be laid to his charge, and is no doubt a matter of conscience. It may be ranked with those many justifiable uprisings against tyranny which are recorded in history, and which have played so important a part in human enfranchisement and progress."-The Tribune, Minneapolis. "The incident is, however, quite in accord with the policy of personal government that William Booth has followed from the initiation of the movement. His régime is a mixture of papal infallibility and Jesuitical discipline. William Booth is a combination of Pius IX. and Ignatius Loyola-with this advantage over those ecclesiastics, that he has always kept the titles to the vast property of his organization in his own household."-The Evening Post, Chicago. “The Salvation Army during the last half-dozen years has won the respect and approval of the American people and press by its untiring efforts and its amazing results. If it is to now advance it must be by the efforts of those Americans who have established and directed it, and as an American, elective, self-governing body. There should forthwith be a free and independent' American Salvation Army."-The Transcript, Boston. "The whole affair illustrates the difficulty of attempting to apply the same system of management to the business of saving men that is used for killing them. It is all right to have generals, brigadiers, red shirts, military rules, and all that kind of thing in making war to kill, but in saving men there must be room for freedom of will and the whole spirit of voluntariness. The two words Salvation and Army do not go well together. There is a gap between them over which the General finds it difficult to lead his own children."-The Advance (Cong.), Chicago. NO PARADE OF THE BLUE AND THE GRAY. THET HE proposed parade of veterans of the Union and Confederate armies in New York on the Fourth of July this year will probably not take place. Gen. Ivan H. Walker, Commanderin-Chief of the Grand Army of the Republic, opposes the parade if “the flag and uniform which symbolized the war of secession" are to appear in line. The committee in charge say that the Confederate flag will not be carried, but the Commander-in-Chief is not satisfied. He is reported to have said: "We can not, as an organization, join in any public demonstration and march with those who fought against the Union clothed in the uniform of a cause that was shot to death by the Grand Army of the Republic thirty years ago. It is intended, it is said, that there shall be but one flag, that of the United States, in the parade. Why not require the same as to uniform? The sooner those who wore the gray shall cease trying to symbolize the 'Lost Cause' by flag or uniform, and shall refrain from representing themselves as a distinct part of the people, the sooner will a full realization of patriotism and fraternity be brought about." The possible failure of the project appears to have given rise to as much comment in the press as that caused by its inception. No Better Time for Such an Exhibition.-"Commander-inChief Walker is all wrong in his present way of looking at the parade, and will find second thoughts wisest and broadest. It is not at all necessary that the Grand Army should, as 'an organization,' join in the parade, altho individual posts may find it convenient to come as such. But the greatest interest would be excited by organizations that existed during the war itself. It is the survivors of companies, squadrons, battalions, regiments, brigades, divisions, corps, and armies that it will be interesting to see marching together. "From this ever-memorable procession, the like of which is not known in history, the members of the Grand Army or the Loyal Legion or other associations are not going to be kept out. They will come with their comrades of bivouac or battlefield, united here from many towns and States. They will be animated by the same spirit that last year caused Confederate veterans to welcome Grand Army veterans so heartily at Louisville. The coming parade will be wholly exceptional, and as it is the first, so it may be the only one of the sort. And we may add that it could come at no better time for our relations with foreign lands. It will show that we are hand in hand in loyal brotherhood, and all for the Union!"-The Sun, New York. Postponement Will Hurt Nobody.—“Inasmuch as there is, to say the least, a doubt whether our veterans in gray would be welcome in New York, it is right that the men of the South should not put themselves in a position to be snubbed. Besides, a reunion resulting in a quarrel would do harm to the country, whereas the indefinite postponement of the reunion will hurt nobody, except a few who expected to use it to advertise themselves. We are far from charging upon the people generally of the city of New York any word, deed, or thought of inhospitality in this matter; we know where the opposition comes from, but, really, New York is not a good place for a Confederate reunion. "We shall be ready to see our friends on June 30, but could not be ready sooner. Let all the old Confederates who purposed going to the New York reunion be consoled by the thought that there will be a very fine reunion-Confederate reunion-here, and that in Richmond no objection will be made to those who choose to indulge themselves in the 'rebel yell,' or who wish to march again under their old and tattered battle-flag.”—The Dispatch, Richmond, Va. Distinctions between Loyalty and Treason. “It is just as well that the proposed 'Blue and Gray' parade in New York on July 4, in which the Union and Confederate veterans were to take part, has been abandoned. "The opposition of the G.A.R. was not founded on any spirit of resentment, or a disposition to fight the war over again, or to fan the smouldering embers of sectional hatred, or any such thing. The people who never smelt powder, excepting on the Fourth of July, are the ones who do most of the sneering at the unwillingness to obliterate distinctions between loyalty and treason. "By all means, let bygones be bygones, the dead past bury its dead, let us act in the living present, let the olive branch be ex tended, let the bloody chasm be bridged and abridged, and all that sort of thing. But forgiveness is one thing, and the truth of history is another thing. The eternal distinctions between good and evil, right and wrong, union and disunion, patriotism and treachery, freedom and slavery, can never be wiped out. To pretend that they can be, that they have been, is not to promote good will and the healing of the breach, but is merely to degrade all concerned."—The Advertiser, Boston. Distinction between Union and Confederate Soldiers.— "There is, as our Colonel says, a broad distinction between Union soldiers and Confederate soldiers. Is it not marked? This nation pays nearly $150,000,000 a year in pensions, and many million dollars more in maintaining homes for the Union soldiers. To try to enforce the distinction that exists between Union soldiers and Confederates by declaring that old Confederate soldiers shall not take part in the Fourth of July celebration with Union soldiers does certainly seem to be a trifle unreasonable. The Colo nel declares that the G. A. R., of which he is the head, shall keep up this distinction, and he will not allow any parade in which the Blue and the Gray shall mingle. Now, we think the distinction between the two soldiers is so great that it is not at all endangered by fraternizing on the Fourth of July. We think the distinction is much more robust, evidently, than the Colonel does. We think, indeed, that this action, if it can do anything, can only belittle that distinction."- The News, Indianapolis. "As citizens of a common country, reunited in sentiment, in aims and in aspirations let us work shoulder to shoulder in material fields, and hand in hand in social life, but leave military memories to each other, without ostentatious and perfunctory manifestations of fraternity. If we are fraternal there is no need for the demonstrations. If we are not, the demonstrations will not make us so. Better drop the Blue and Gray business."— The Chronicle, Augusta, Ga. REPUBLICAN PARTY DISSENSIONS OVER THE 'HE political sensation of the hour is the open fight between free-silver and anti-free-silver leaders of the Republican Party, which resulted in killing tariff legislation in the Senate last week. Senator Morrill, the Chairman of the Finance Committee, attempted for the second time to call up the House tariff bill for action and was a second time defeated. Senator Cannon, of Utah, joined the four Republican Senators, Messrs. Carter and Mantle, of Montana; Teller, of Colorado; and Dubois, of Idaho, who had voted against a similar motion on February 13. The vote was 33 to 22, 5 Republicans, 6 Populists, and 22 Democrats voting against Senator Morrill's motion. The occasion was taken to make declarations and counter-declarations of Republican Party policy. These declarations on the one hand amounted to reading the silver Senators, out of the party, and fixing upon them the responsibility for the admitted defeat of all tariff legislation at this session. On the other hand the silver Senators' defense was to the effect that they could get along without the party as well as the party could get along without them, and that the proposed tariff bill was not a Republican protective measure in principle, but a political campaign maneuver. Senator Carter, who is chairman of the Republican National Committee, speaking in defense of the attitude of his Republican silver colleagues, said in part: "To insure speedy relief, Republicans dropped their own principles on economic legislation and in lieu thereof accepted three distinctly Democratic heresies on the tariff: Horizontal revision, ad valorem duties, and the Wilson bill as a foundation for a revenue scheme [The House (Dingley) bill]. And they proceeded to its enactment, fondly hoping that the President might condescendingly consent to favor it with his signature or his sufferance. The bill reaches the Senate; a substitute is reported for it. Certain patriotic Republicans, forgetting the platform of 1892 on the tariff question, forgetting all the traditions of their party, seek to have Republicans in this chamber who are devoted to bimetalism and protection, two elementary principles of Republican faith, put in such position as apparently to be compelled to vote against one of their principles in order to secure the success of the other. Some gentlemen who pretended to understand the situation refused to cooperate. To the candid judgment of honest men I leave the determination of questions relating to the fidelity of Republicans in this Senate to their party principles. "Brutal assaults are made, not only upon the Republican Senators and Representatives, but upon the unoffending people of the States they represent as well. This is thoughtless; this is dishonest; this is unjust; this is treasonable to the principles of the Republican Party. The Republicans of 1 the East can not maintain this position of total opposition to legislation in behalf of silver, without openly, clearly, and distinctly proclaiming that the plank of the party platform relating to silver and gold was a fraud, a delusion, and a snare, and in that position the conscience of the Republican Party of the nation will not sustain or justify them. The Eastern Republican opposition to silver legislation is unseemly and unwise. It has become fashionable, apparently, to abuse silver Republican Senators and silver Republican States, and thoughtless Republicans have injudiciously announced that Western States may take up their traps and leave the Republican Party-that their votes are not needed. Happily the invitation lacks commanding authority. "It is important that Republicans should understand that this thoughtless chatter, this malicious and unjustified abuse, if not tempered by the better sense of the Republicans who meet in national convention, will inevitably lead to a decree forever forbidding the Republican Party from placing another law on the statute-books of this nation, To conceal the gravity of the situation will serve no useful purpose. Timely admonition will prove an element of saving grace. Let no Republican be deceived. He who follows the President antagonizes the principles and purposes of the Republican Party. Every Republican who joins the President in his demand for the absolute fixing of the single gold standard upon this country, to the permanent exclusion of all hope for bimetalism, makes his contribution to a force destined to disrupt and destroy the Republican party. It is high time that Republicans who claim to be within the party should take their cues from the party platform rather than from the White House." The language of the plank of the Minneapolis platform of 1892 under discussion, quoted by Senator Platt, is as follows: "The American people, from tradition and interest, favor bimetalism, and the Republican Party demands the use of both gold and silver as standard money, with such restrictions and under such provisions, to be determined by legislation, as will secure the maintenance of the parity of values of the two metals." A Poor Rule that Doesn't Work Both Ways. "Why should Western Republicans, who recognize the superior importance of bimetalism, be expected to stand for protection without wavering when their Eastern colleagues have no hesitation at all in joining hands with the goldite element of the Democratic Party in order to maintain the gold standard and to utterly destroy silver for use as a money metal? The conditions the time of it. Things have occurred since then. "What they want this year is a currency plank that shall interpret itself-a declaration so simple, plain, frank, straightforward, and emphatic that the dullest voter can not help understanding it and the most casuistic compromiser, harmony-monger, and cottoner to the free-silverites can not explain it away. The experts in the art of juggling with words should be shown to back seats at St. Louis next summer. Their services are not required.”—The Courant (Rep.), Hartford, Conn. "Have not we as good a right to insist that the Eastern Republicans shall live up to the money plank of the last platform as they can possibly have to demand that we shall aid them in the reestablishment of protection in this country? It is a poor rule that does not work both ways, and in so far as the Republicans of the West are concerned they have quite unanimously determined that until their Eastern brethren make up their minds to keep faith on the money question no more assistance can be expected at our hands for the enactment of another protective tariff law. The Vice of Compromise.-"It is the chronic vice of Washington that it tries to compromise everything. There will be all sorts of schemes proposed within the next two months for satisfying the silver bolters. But the declaration that there shall be no protection of home industries until there is free coinage of silver raises an issue which can not be compromised. The act of men who defeat the Republican Party in order to force upon it their individual will leaves no room for any course except an impossible surrender or their complete overthrow. The public demand for protection will not be weaker, but immeasurably stronger and more imperative for this reverse, and its extent and intensity will measure the hostility toward the men elected as Republicans who have turned against their principles, and denied to American industries the help so sorely needed."- The Tribune (Rep.), New York. "We are just as sound Protectionists as the people of Massachusetts or Rhode Island or Ohio, or any other Eastern State, but we are also firm believers in reciprocity, and we will not consent to aid in pulling any more high-tariff chestnuts out of the fire for our Eastern friends until they show by their words and their votes in Congress that they are just as good bimetalists as we are."-The Republican (Rep.), Denver. "The Republicans have proved even more incapable than were the Democrats of securing united action in Congress and directing legislation to positive ends. And the reason is the same, that on the one great issue before the country they are irreconcilably divided. The attempt to gloss over this division and unite the party on a fictitious tariff issue has failed, as it ought to fail, and it matters little whether Mr. Morrill reads Mr. Teller out of the party or Mr. Teller reads out Mr. Morrill. The silver men at least understand the difference between a live issue and a dead one. They are standing together, and they will hold up their party and Congress and the country until the friends of honest money get together and present a united front against them."The Times (Ind. Dem.), Philadelphia. Where Responsibility Rests.-"Senator Carter's plea of justification for his vote in opposition to the Dingley tariff revenue bill is that it did not give adequate protection to American-grown wool. Very true; but neither did it give adequate protection to any American product. It was not designed for the readjustment of tariffs on the basis of adequate protection. It was designed as an emergency measure. It sought to increase revenue to such an extent as should prevent the alarming progress of treasury deficits. And it sought to do this by imposing slight tariff duties where none existed, and by making small increases of duties where they were most obviously too low. . . . Had the Republicans of the Senate stood together on this compromise bill, the responsibility for preventing increase of revenue would have rested with the President and his party. As it is, Mr. Carter and his associates have assumed the responsibility. Admit the force of all that Mr. Carter said yesterday, concede that he made a great speech and acquitted himself most creditably, and The Inter Ocean (Rep.), yet the responsibility remains." Chicago. The Minneapolis Plank Will Not Do.-"We do not agree with Senator Platt [of Connecticut] that the currency plank in the Minneapolis platform-the platform of 1892-should be brought down from the lumber-room and made to do duty again in the platform of 1896. We differ with him, radically and with emphasis. Rightly interpreted, that plank was well enough in "The party platform must no longer juggle with words as it did in 1888 and 1892, and as some of its most eminent candidates for nomination are doing now. It must declare for sound money, meaning gold, and against the free and unlimited coinage of silver. Senator Carter may not be able to remain in the party with such a platform, but he is not wanted in it, as it will be better to have him retire and a new man elected chairman than have the party win through evasion and trickery, subjecting it to the domination of the silver men."-The Ledger (Ind. Rep.), Philadelphia. "The great Republican silverite bolt of 1896, instead of beginning in the national convention, began in Congress. It came the other end foremost. Republican Senators representing the silver States, headed by the chairman of the Republican national committee, deliberately walked out of their party ranks, as Senators Jeff Davis, Hunter, Mason, Benjamin, and the other secessionist Senators, headed by Vice-President Breckinridge, walked out of the Senate chamber in 1861. It is one of the extremely probable events of the future that history will repeat itself in reversed |