MR. CLEVELAND is a famous pie-eater. We have no doubt that Miss Frankie will always set the pie plate next to Grover.-Baltimore Herald (Ind.), May 31. THE President's marriage appears to be altogether the most popular act of his administration up to date.-New York Mail and Express (Rep.), May 31.

ALL honor to the President. We fear Mr. Tilden would not have been as wise a man in his place.—Kansas City Times (Dem.), May 29.

THE chances are that the better half of this administration will be in favor of a second term.-Philadelphia Times (Ind.), June 1.

FOR a national administration a wedding ring is a better ornament than a whisky ring.-Newark News (Dem.), June 1.

THE Nation extends congratulations to the happy couple.-Pittsburgh Commercial-Gazette (Rep.), May 29.

PRESIDENT CLEVELAND has carried his own Buffalo ward this time.—Albany Argus (Dem.), May 31.

DECORATION DAY AT RIVERSIDE.

THE exercises at General Grant's tomb, Riverside Park, New York, on Decoration Day, have elicited press comment as follows:

New York Mail and Express (Rep.), May 31. MAGNIFICENT floral offerings for the decoration of General Grant's Riverside Park tomb have come from San Francisco, from Chicago, and from all sections of the country. Members of the Grand Army of the Republic have come from the far West to participate in or to witness the ceremonies at this new national shrine of patriotic sentiment, who have never thought of coming here before on such an occasion. The spontaneous, unconcerted movement of Grant's old soldiers have revealed the fact that New York, already the one locality that was richest in revolutionary memories, has now become far more interesting as the burial place of Grant. And to-day's impressive ceremonies at and near Grant's tomb, in which the Navy, the Army, the Grand Army of the Republic, the militia and citizens generally, can participate as they could nowhere else so effectively in the country, suggest the wisdom of the selection of such a site.

Troy Telegram (Rep.), May 31.

It is not alone tender loyalty to New York's dead heroes and the cause for which they fought that marks the significance of to-day's celebration. All this has its part in the observance, but there is that in connection with it which makes the affair national in its character and importance. The national shrine is there. The great leader's tomb is to be for the first time decorated by the hands of his old comrades, and from all over the country have come floral offerings and loyal representatives to do honor to his memory. So this year that one tomb in Riverside Park becomes symbolical of the last resting places of all the mighty host. The celebration in New York will henceforth be an affair of the Nation, and as each year rolls around the Nation's loving tributes will be laid upon Grant's tomb, and tender memories of his great service will cluster there as comrades from far and wide gather to decorate the grave of their old commander.

Brooklyn Union (Ind.), May 31.

General Logan at Grant's Tomb.

THE special feature of this year's Decoration Day is the doing of honor to the memory of the Nation's hero at his tomb in Riverside Park-a feature which is sure to become permanent and which adds a keener personal interest to the day's significance. Impossible as it is to think of a time when the national cemeteries. in most of the older Northern States and in the States where the battle-fields were, shall be forgotten or shall fail to remind the people once a year of the Nation's debt to its defenders, it is easier to imagine that the graves of men whose names shall have been forgotten will suffer forgetfulness than it is to conceive of a time when the tomb of Grant or his monument will not be the Mecca of patriotic people. His personality will be distinct in the popular mind, and his career will compel admiration after every man who looked in his face or remembers his death shall have been dead.

New York Times (Ind.), June I.

IN speaking of the great services of General Grant to the country, PostmasterGeneral Vilas made a timely and impressive appeal yesterday for a fitting memorial at the tomb of the Nation's hero. He reminded the possessors of wealth what they owe to him in the opportunities they enjoy, and called upon them to consider their own necessity "lest that sacred grave, in want of fitting honor, become a monument" to their reproach. The revival of patriotic feeling ought, indeed, to show itself in more generous contributions for the monument. It would be a national shame for this token of a people's gratitude to be neglected or delayed much longer. General Vilas's reminder was vociferously applauded. It is to be hoped that it will find a more substantial response.

Albany Journal (Rep.), May 31.

Pittsburgh Dispatch (Ind.), June 1.

POLITICAL.

FRANCE AND THE PRINCES.

THE introduction by the French ministry of a bill conferring on the government power to expel the Orleans princes has elicited the comments which follow: Boston Globe (Dem.), May 31.

FROM the ambassadors' tribune in the French Chamber of Deputies, two men, in no wise resembling each other in appearances, but each representing a similar political theory, sat Thursday last the interested spectators of a scene which promises to be the prologue to a drama that threatens more disaster to republicanism in Europe than anything that has occurred since old General Monk, disgusted at weak Richard Cromwell's hesitancy in assuming his great father's mantle, proclaimed the fugitive Charles Stewart King of England. The two men were, one the grave, white-haired, gray-bearded, austere Ambassador of Germany, Count Munster, and the other the fair-haired, genial brother of the Czar, Grand Duke Valdimir, of Russia. There they sat, the first with indignation written on his face, at what he may have thought a sacrilegious onslaught upon the divine right of royalty, and the other with a gay, cynical laugh, at what he considered a dangerous blow to continental democracy. As a Romanoff he hated democracies, and could afford to laugh, for beneath him a member of the French Republican Government stood, amid a storm of shouts and hisses, making desperate efforts to acknowledge to the world that republicanism in France was a failure. M. Demole, keeper of the seats in the orators' tribune, was attempting to move the adoption of a bill to expel the French princes, a tacit acknowledgment that the people were beginning to long for their golden chains of kingly rule; that the government sought to remove the dangerous bauble that tempted them before it was too late. In other words, it was an attempt to make Orleans, M. Comte de Paris, a sacrifice for the mistakes of the Republic. Who is the victim and what has he done? He is a well-bred, portly gentleman, of a literary turn of mind, whose only misfortune is that he was born the son of a King of France. He was an officer in the Union Army during our late war, and is even more popular in his own country for his liberality and unostentatiousness than he is in America. His crime is that, coupled with his good personal traits, he has minded his own business, kept clear of politics, and consequently made no mistakes. The result is that such a deep impression has been made upon so large a number of his countrymen that he is just the man to rescue his country from its present political and financial plight, that he runs a great danger of having a crown thrust upon him.

The Chronicle, New York, May 29.

DURING the last three or four years France has repeatedly allowed herself to show signs of alarm because of imagined dangers resulting from the presence on her soil of the princes of the House of Orleans. Expulsion has again and again been threatened; but until now the calls of the extremists in the chamber and throughout the country have been ineffectual in rousing the government to adopt any active measure. This is the second time that pressure has been brought to bear upon M. de Freycinet, looking to the same object. It is well known that the French premier is personally opposed to extreme action in the premises, believing that the danger spoken of is more imaginary than real, and very wisely concluding that expulsion might expose the country to greater danger by begetting national sympathy. and thus giving increased importance to the members of the exiled family. On the former occasion his firmness was rewarded with success. On the present occasion, however, he has found it necessary to yield so far, at least, as to introduce a bill giving the government the power to expel, if in its judgment the necessity should arise. Such is the aspect of the situation while we write. It remains to be seen what use will be made of the power when acquired. There can be no doubt that the spirit which calls for special legislation calls for immediate action. The new law, how

ever, will have the effect of hindering too hasty action. It will always be in the power of the government to consider whether the act charged against the prince or princes amounts to treason or to anything like active pretension to the throne. The princes will no doubt be on their guard; and it is probable that the mere passing of the law will have the effect of quieting, at least temporarily, the public mind. If it should be otherwise, and it should be found that the passing of the bill is but the preliminary to expulsion, there is but small likelihood that the Comte de Paris will be the only victim. If the sentence of expulsion goes forth at all, it will go forth against all pretenders and all families of all pretenders. The stroke will fall with equal severity on Bonapartists and on Orleanists; and the last quarter of the nine. teenth century, like the first, will be made familiar with the French princes in exile. If confiscation should follow, the exiles will all the more command public sympathy.

New York Star (Dem.), May 31.

As long as the Orleans heirs are treated simply as other citizens are treated there is but little danger that they will ever be more than citizens, unless the voice of France should demand, in unmistakable tones, a change from the republic to a monarchy. In such a case their own antecedents would force them to the fore and the good sense of the world would applaud the elevation of the Comte de Paris as a far less evil than the return of the Napoleonic dynasty. Is it possible that the French government knows and dreads the rising flood of such a sentiment among the people? Can it be that secret signs and portents, unknown to the world at large, are making the rulers of France uneasy for the stability of the republic? We can hardly credit the fact that dangerous undercurrents known only to the French government are at fault. It is more logical to ascribe it to one of those occasional eruptions of capricious folly so inseparable from the mercurial Gallic nature, which from time to time shake our best convictions of their capacity for wise government. If there is indeed a rising current in favor of Orleanism, no possible help could forward it so surely to its flood as unmerited persecution; no possible barrier would so hold it in check as that wise policy which would simply ignore it and at the same time rule France so justly that there would be no excuse for change of government. If French republicanism would cut its own throat, it can best do so by inaugurating a policy of proscription.

New York Herald (Ind), May 29.

IN our issue of October 12 we published an interview with a gentleman who is intimately associated with the Comte de Paris, in which it was asserted that the Comte "confidently looks forward to the time when he shall be called upon to mount the throne of France;" and this confidence was buttressed by the result of the elections which we published on October 12, showing that out of 7,500,000 votes, excluding Paris, 3,300,000, or very nearly half, had been thrown on the conservative side. That fact not only alarmed Paris, but startled France. It proved that conservatism had incredibly increased, and that the door between the Comte de Paris and the fulfilment of his dream was not firmly bolted, but simply closed. These are stern facts and must be faced. With popular opinion in such a state that a slight circumstance can throw it to the one side or the other, nothing could be more unwise or foolish than for the Chamber of Deputies to make a martyr of the Comte de Paris and double his chances of success by persecution. There is no stronger element in human nature than sympathy with the oppressed, and when sympathy controls politics changes are rapidly made.

Philadelphia Inquirer (Rep.), May 29.

ABOUT the worst use the Government of France can make of the ex-royal personages who elect to dwell within the borders of the Republic is to honor them with political persecution. The official apprehension the members of the Orleans and Bourbon families should have that consideration accorded to other citizens of their wealth and intelligence, and no more. To make martyrs of them is to give them undue importance and to establish them in a position where they can command the sympathy and support of all the opponents of the existing administration. It is a confession of weakness for the government to tacitly admit that the princes are regarded with fear; and furthermore, if they are really dangerous to the Republic as citizens under the authority of the State, they will be far more dangerous as exiles freed from all obligations to the State and suffering from proscription.

New Orleans Times-Democrat (Dem.), May 26.

THIS act is a confession of weakness by the Republicans and will be so recog nized by the world. It will have exactly the contrary effect from what is intended, for it will arouse sympathy for the prince, both in and out of France. Persecu tion like this always reacts, and the prince, in his exile, will win thousands of supporters, to whom the action of the French Government will appear in its true light of tyranny and persecution. The more eminent and conservative of the French Republicans have seen this, and protested against any banishment of the French princes except for cause, but France is drifting toward Radicalism, and the same Government which welcomes back the Communist and Socialist murderers, and wipes out their treason, declares the Comte d'Orleans guilty and worthy of banishment, because of his daughter's marriage.

Philadelphia Press (Rep.), May 31.

IT is by no means certain that the threatened expulsion will take place, since the six ministers who desired discretionary power in the premises are not necessarily to be set down as disposed to exert this power forthwith. If the Comte de Paris would only abdicate his pretensions in some effective though perhaps informal way, there would be no dispositon to exile him. As it is, the republic is perfectly justified in dealing with pretenders as other regimes have done. It is entirely a question of policy, but a good deal may depend on how it is answered. New York Tribune (Rep.), May 29.

THE act of the Anarchist Deputy Basly, in bringing forward a bill to confiscate

all the property of the princes, and insisting upon "urgency" for it as well as for the expulsion bill, may perhaps have a different effect from that aimed at, however. So scandalous a proposition may bring to their senses some of the deputies who have hitherto aided the expulsion movement without reflecting upon its implications. It would be very likely to have this effect in any other country than France, but it is never safe to venture upon predictions in regard to that people. The French princes are probably in fact quite harmless, or would be if left alone. French politicians, however, unconsciously expose their want of faith in the stability of the present form of Government by the exaggerated alarm with which they view all elements of hostility.

New York Mail and Express (Rep.), May 28.

IF the Count de Paris driven out of France by the present government, it will be because there was nobody handy to save him from his friends. It will be the consequence of two much "demonstration." Demonstrations of affection and fidelity on every possible occasion—especially every occasion that gave opportunity for religious celebration-have exceedingly irritated the Republicaus; and as the government has put down the Red Republican demonstrations in the streets, it is demanded that it shall take notice of the royalist demonstrations in churches and palaces. Some of these demonstrations have been due to the initiative of the family as when they have so-called hunts in quasi-royal state in Chantilly.

St. Louis Globe-Democrat (Rep.), May 29.

AS THESE gentlemen are old, amiable and anything but revolutionists, it is difficult for the non-Frenchman to see how their presence can be a menace to the French government. The Count de Paris and one of his brothers, the Prince de Joinville, served for a time on the staff of General McClellan during the early part of the rebellion. Both have always been warm friends of the United States. The former has written what is conceded to be the best history yet published of the American civil war. Intelligent, unprejudiced persons will be apt to consider that the system of government which is endangered by the presence of such men as these must be weak, indeed.

St. Louis Republican (Dem.), May 30.

THE princes are harmless at home, but if forced to go abroad may not be harmless; are likely to be a rallying point for popular disaffection and a standing menace to the Republic. While in France they are bound in honor to do nothing against her political institutions; driven out of France they will be under no such obligation, and may become a fruitful source of mischief. We hope the Chamber of Deputies will be wiser than the Cabinet, and by rejecting the expulsion bill save the Government from something much worse than a bad blunder, and at the same time spare France what would be little less than a national shame. Evansville Journal (Rep.), May 29.

THE Orleans princes are professional marplots, and have no legitimate place in a republic of even the semi-monarchial tendencies of France. Don Carlos, the pretender, is not wanted in Spain; in fact, that country is not very healthy for him. Royalty on the one hand and anarchy on the other are becoming very unpopular.

Charleston News and Courier (Dem), May 29.

THESE Orleanists, in their normal condition, are entirely inoffensive, and in no wise dangerous. They run no risks, and think more of their chateaux and their cash than of a French crown with the shadow of the sword over it. But the French Government will make them count for more than they are worth.

It is

If they have broken the laws or are conspiring against the State, the Republic should be able to deal with them as it would deal with any other citizens. certain that if their influence is of the kind that will bring trouble to the Republic, it will not be decreased by making them martyrs.-Newark News (Dem.), May 28.

AMERICAN toadies are very much afraid that the expulsion of the Comte de Chanibord from France will make a martyr of him and create popular sympathy for his pretensions. France has not much sympathy to waste on exiles of that sort just at present. Brooklyn Times (Rep.), May 29.

EXPULSION of the French princes will not strengthen the pillars of the Republic. The proposition is a mistake.-National Republican (Rep.), May 31.

OLEOMARGARINE.

A BILL providing for the taxation of oleomargarine at the rate of ten cents per pound has been for some time before the national House of Representatives and has been extensively discussed by the press. The editorial opinions advanced as to the bill and as to the arguments for and against its adoption are fairly represented in the appended extracts.

Montreal Gazette.

OLEOMARGARINE can be made at a profit for ten cents a pound, so that it will be seen how strong is the temptation to dispose of it as the better article, a temptation that no application of the law is yet known to have overcome. The recognition of this fact has led to an agitation in the United States for legislation to suppress its manufacture altogether, and that it will be successful ere long there is small reason to doubt. The interests at stake are, in reality, much wider than appear directly in the issue. The curtailment of the dairy product--and the effect of oleomargarine competition has nigh brought about that condition in some sections of New York State-means also a reduction in the productive capabilities of a large section of the country, for it is only by resort to dairy farming that the lands

of the older sections of this continent have been able to be profitably worked after their virgin fertility had been exhausted by the successive grain cropping they at first underwent.

Omaha Bee (Rep.).

THE bogus butter business thrives on fraud. The fraud begins at the factory when the stuff is packed in tubs marked Fine Creamery." It is continued by the retailers when the neatly wrapped rolls are palmed off on customers as the "the best country butter." It only ends when a surprised stomach wrestles with the doctored-up lard in the vain attempt to digest it as it does the product of the churn. The farmers of the United States are a unit in demanding that such fraud shall be made impossible, because its successful continuance means the certain destruction of our great dairy interests. Consumers of butter who discover that their family grocer has been unable to resist the temptation to make 100 per cent. profit by charging creamery prices for deodorized lard, are anxious that such temptation shall be forever removed. Bogus butter must go.

Pittsburgh Dispatch (Ind.).

It would be interesting to know upon what authority Mr. Dunham, of Illinois, said, the other day, in a speech in defense of the bogus butter industry that the manufacturers of artificial butter would willingly color it pink or sky-blue instead of yellow. If the manufacturers would do that, they would clearly raise their business above all charges of fraud. A manufactured article that presents itself to the public for what it really is and cannot be used to perpetuate a fraud, is above any attempt at legal regulation or restriction. If the manufacturers are ready to do what their advocates say they are, they can stop the entire dispute at once. But a sufficient answer to Mr. Dunham's declaration is contained in the further query: Why do they not do it?

Washington Post (Dem.).

IF Congress is to put a prohibitory tax on butterine at the command of the dairy interest, why should it not put a prohibitory tax on gas at the command of the whale oil and petroleum interests, and on the blue jeans at the command of the woolen interest, and on pork and sausages at the command of the hucksters of mutton-chops, and on plain straw hats for the "protection" of the Panama hat importers, and on two-dollar shoes for the protection of Burt's shoes at six dollars a pair, and on cider and lager beer for the benefit of champagne? If poor men are not to be allowed to eat butterine when they find it wholesome and palatable, why on earth should they be permitted to buy anything that is cheap?

St. Louis Post-Dispatch (Dem.).

OLEOMARGARINE is manufactured in various parts of the country, but it is the peculiar and distinguishing product of Chicago. Its intimate connection with hoglard and the packing business makes it dear to the Chicago heart and invests it with the odor of sanctity in the Chicago imagination. As the sight of the palm cheers the weary eye of the Arabian exile, so does the vision of lard, in whatever form, delight the vision of the Chicago wanderer under alien skies. The sensibilities of communities are as much entitled to respect as those of individuals. The great grease-manipulating city should not be wounded in its tenderest part, or flippantly affronted by unfeeling Congressmen.

Washington Slar (Ind.).

St. Paul Press (Rep.).

New York Herald (Ind.).

New York World (Dem.).

Manchester Union (Dem.).

day: "We members know that it is wrong, but we don't dare vote against it." The conditions are nearly the same as on the arbitration bill, only more pronounced if anything. Members declare it unconstitutional and impolitic, but trim their votes in accord with their estimate of consequences in their respective districts. This is rank and disgraceful cowardice, and deserves an emphatic rebuke at the polls. Cincinnati Evening Post (Ind.).

THE people of the United States have a right to be protected from harmful adulterations in butter substitutes, and from impositions in the sale of the butter substitutes for genuine butter. To secure the enjoyment of the right there must be Government inspection of both the facture and the sale. The cost of such Government inspection should be paid by a reasonable license of the dealers and by either a tax on the butter substitute or a license of the facturers. Both should be regulated so as to pay expenses of inspection and no more.

Chicago Herald (Ind.).

To tax imitation butter 10 cents a pound would undoubtedly have the effect of increasing the price of genuine butter, and to that extent the poor man not only, but the rich man and everybody else except the butter producers, would suffer. On the other hand, the poor man as well as the rich man is suffering now because stuff which is not butter and which is not worth as much as butter is being sold everywhere for butter prices. In keeping the poor man's interests in view in one case they should not be lost sight of in the other.

New York Star (Dem.).

THERE is abundant cause for the criticism of those who insist that it is inconsistent for Democrats to vote to tax a manufacture out of existence. There is no objection to laying a tax on bogus butter, nor to arranging the methods of the taxation so as to enable the public as well as the Government officers to discriminate between the untaxed dairy product and the taxed imitation. It is a very different matter, however, to use the taxing power for the specific purpose of stopping the manufacNew Orleans Times-Democrat (Dem.).

ture.

If this product was offered in market as what it is a mixture of butter and the grease extracted from animal refuse-it would have no sale at all. It does have an immense sale, because, by the aid of drugs, it is made to resemble the best article of butter, and is sold under the odious false pretense that it is butter.— St. Louis Republican (Dem.).

IN regard to the excessive tax proposed, the Plain Dealer believes it is entirely uncalled for. A nominal tax that would definitely distinguish the imitation from the genuine butter would be sufficient. Yet there is no necessity for a tax of any kind, either as a measure of revenue, protection, or restriction.--Cleveland Plain Dealer (Dem.).

THIS question does not lie between the producers of tallow and the producers of butter alone. It is mainly between honesty and dishonesty, from one point of view, and between the greed of a limited number of capitalists and the general welfare of the nation from another point.-Ohio State Journal (Rep.).

PRESIDENTIAL POSSIBILITIES.

DISCUSSION of candidates and chances for the general election of 1888 has become a very pronounced feature of editorial comment, the drift of which is indicated by the extracts given below:

Memphis Avalanche (Dem.).

IT IS significant that Northern Republican papers begin to be filled with interviews and speculations and opinions of leading citizens directed to whether Blaine would be a popular candidate for the Republicans to nominate in 1888. The question contains matter of supreme interest to Gen. John A. Logan. So far as the Democrats are concerned, with Mr. Cleveland as the logical and inevitable candidate, the Democratic party will not object to a renewal of the old fight, with the Augusta speech as an addition. What it did by a seratch in 1884 it will do by an overwhelming vote in 1888. We know that there are many Democrats who regard Mr. Cleveland as the last Democrat their party is likely to nominate. They will be surprised to find, ten days before the meeting of the next convention, with what ease they will be able to say, "Well,-after all, perhaps it is best as it is." With Cleveland against the field, the field will enter the convention with defeat acknowledged. This is so logically inevitable that not even possible trickery in New York will prevent it. There are Republicans who think that their cause has grown since the last election. They have erred in supposing that the many differences within the Democratic party will result in a loss of votes and in believing that the many new issues and loosening of old party ties will result in benefit to them. To the personal objections which destroyed Blaine, and to the fatal blunder of his Lafayette, Ind., speech, will be added the fact that, four years further away from sectional and race issues, Blaine's nomination will mean an inevitable recurrence to these dead issues. But there is an obstacle in Blaine's way which he will find it hard to surmount in seeking the nomination. Logan has not only offered himself as the soldier candidate and exponent besides of all bourbonism, but he has secured a sufficient standing to enable him almost certainly to defeat Blaine, although his own nomination may be an impossibility. We would be glad to know that either Logan or Blaine could receive the nomination. Either would make Cleveland's re-election a certainty.

Philadelphia Press (Rep.).

IN response to the question how it would be practicable, if Cleveland wants a renomination, to take his own State away from him, the New York Sun tells us that it is a question of delegates in the State convention, and that from present indications Governor Hill would beat Mr. Cleveland in the Democratic State Convention very handsomely. The Sun very suggestively adds: "It should not be forgotten that so great a politician as Daniel Manning is no longer a potentiality in these little matters." But what about William C. Whitney? Has he lost his grip in New York city? Has the custom-house no power? Has the Manning machine broken up with the disablement of its chief, or has it been captured by Governor Hill? It must be owned that it looks a good deal that way. Governor Hill very skillfully carried the State convention last year, and secured his own nomination and election; but he had the advantage of being already in the place to be filled-the same advantage which Mr. Cleveland will have if a candidate for renomination; and, though he rallied a more positive Democratic sentiment, he had no direct issue with the Administration. He made his own aggressive fight and encountered no open opposition. Since then it is plain that he has been strengthening himself among the Democratic politicians, while the President has as plainly lost ground. Yet it would be a curious spectacle if the President, desiring a renomination, should have no political standing or power in his own State. Another Buffalo President was impotent against the unfriendly elements of his own party in New York. Mr. Fillmore, with all the powers of the Presidency, was helpless against Mr. Seward with the Whig party at his back. Mr. Fillmore was an accident in one way as Mr. Cleveland is in another.

He had more of the

political instinct than the present incumbent of the White House; but, in spite of it, he was not in sympathy with the Whig sentiment of the State, and could secure no hold on it. Yet even with this example, it would be singular if Mr. Cleveland should find the scepter in New York taken away from him by the man who was only the tail of his ticket in 1882, and who accidentally became governor only through Mr. Cleveland's elevation to the Presidency. It is altogether probable that New York will determine the Democratic nomination in 1888 as it did in 1884, and this gives more interest and importance to the question who will determine New York. Meanwhile, it is said that so sagacious a politician as Samuel J. Randall holds that if the Democratic party doesn't renominate and re-elect Cleveland, it can't elect anybody.

Boston Herald (Ind.).

ONE party or the other will nominate for President two years hence a man who stands for the dominating wish of the people in regard to the most vital questions then before them. What will this controlling issue be? One of the aspirants in the Senate acts as thongh he imagines the country is, and will continue to be, most deeply concerned in seeing how much money can be added to a pension list that already requires $75,000,000 annually. He is mistaken. His appeal is to a class, and to a class that is divided-and will continue to be-between the two parties. Other candidates hope to succeed by attaching themselves to the rotten remnants of a sectional banner. They, too, are mistaken. The people will not go back in '88 to the issues of '68. One candidate has proclaimed his belief, and several are acting in accordance with it, that the people really love to be taxed-that they take a patriotic delight in contributing to a treasury surplus to be squandered in wasteful appropriations. All such are in error. The people have advanced to high executive positions men whom they had reason to believe would fearlessly interpose the veto to save them from needless expense. They do not knowingly advance one who would help to heap burdens on their shoulders. It is easier to tell

ent.

what the issues will not be that will form the ticket than to say at this time what they will be. Congress has not yet adjourned; and in an unlooked-for interval of lucidity it may remove some questions from the list of issues, at least for the presIt has also a short session next winter, in which, as was the case with the Republicans in 1883, the Democrats may improve the opportunity to redeem some of their promises. But if matters shall remain substantially as they are, it is as certain as anything in the future can be that the issues of the next Presidential canvass will turn upon the unsettled questions now troubling the executive and confounding the legislative branches of the Government. The Republicans are apparently planning to turn up as the champions of civil-service reform; but with the confession openly made by their leader in the Senate that they interpose no objection to the appropriation of the offices by the Democrats, if it is done upon party grounds --a position based upon an evident intention of recovering the offices if they regain power-their championship of reform will scarcely be accepted. The record upon the question of taxation is not yet made up; but, if the war taxes are not reduced before then, no issue will be more clearly and stubbornly fought in 1888 than this. There is time, however, for many things to happen in two years, and it is not impossible that the issues of the Presidential year will force the nomination of men who are not now mentioned in connection with the office.

Manchester, N. H., Union (Dem.).

"There is some Carlisle talk for 1888, but a man who hasn't back-bone enough to make up committees of the House to represent his own convictions on important national issues will have to grow a good deal before he attains the Presidential size. - Springfield Republican (Ind.).

This stricture is surprising coming from such a source as the Springfield Republican. If Mr. Carlisle had acted as the Republican criticises him for not, it would have been one of the first to roundly censure him for a dictatorial manner, and for setting his individual opinions tyranically above the body he was called upon to preside over. Mr. Carlisle is here impugned for refraining from that very policy which brought the severest criticism upon the acts of James G. Blaine in a similar position of authority. Law and practice gives to the presiding officer of our national House extensive power unhindered by few restrictions, but the unwritten law of public sentiment inexorably demands that this official shall not abuse his authority or render it offensive. The individual elevated to this high public place fills it the most acceptably when he puts above his personality his capacity as representative of the political power that placed him in position. No other view of his office is tenable, and certainly no other administration can bring satisfaction. No one will contend that a speaker is justified in unduly affecting grave public measures by enforcing his individual views against the majority opinion of those he is presumed to represent. This view covers the whole issue, no matter how it is applied. Mr. Carlisle's record in the speaker's chair stands unimpeached, and the country will have reason to rejoice if it always secures as good a one.

Atlanta Correspondence N. Y. Sun (Dem.).

IN casting an eye over the field Mr. Blaine discovered that he had a precious small following in Georgia. Gen. Grant was the overwhelming choice of the negroes and the non-officeholding element in the Republican party. Mr. Sherman, then Secretary of the Treasury, had every Federal officeholder in his grasp. Blaine was nowhere. He saw, however, a possibility in the distance. Senator Brown had long desired a seat in the United States Senate. He made a race as a rampant Radical in 1868, but nobody voted for him but the black-and-tan and the worse elements of the Bullock forces. He was ingloriously left. He hankered after the coveted place. He longed for it. He had worked for it under every conceivable arrangement, but it was no go before the people. Blaine knew that Gordon wanted to improve his private fortunes. Blaine desired to break Grant's and Sherman's hold in Georgia, and when the thing was ripe, Brown turned up in the Senate Gordon retired from that body. Blaine got eight delegates against Grant's six in the Republican convention, and Field secured the control of a solid delegation of Democrats to Cincinnati. Blaine made Garfield the nominee, and Field retired on his honors. The trading Southern Democrats got all the Southern Federal offices. Certain newspapers got rich, and everything was lovely until the thing leaked out in Georgia, and now Senator Brown and ex-Senator Gordon are fighting the fight over again. Can The Sun throw any light on the affair? Is it true that Blaine is now reaching out again toward the South?

Petersburg, Va., Index-Appeal (Dem.).

THEY are talking of making ex-Senator James L. Alcorn, of Mississippi, the Republican candidate for Vice-President two years hence. We are always looking out for honors for Virginia's sons, but it is not at all likely that the Republican nomination, if it comes to the South, as it probably will, will fall to any citizen of this Commonwealth. With Cameron or Mahone on the ticket, defeat would be certain of course. There is no Northern State, to say nothing of Southern States, that would deliberately vote to elevate to the second office in the country any man who had represented, as both these gentlemen have, the principle that a State is not bound to the fulfillment of its obligations to the same extent that an individual is. The Republican field in the South is not an extensive one, and there may be difficulty in finding a candidate more acceptible than ex-Senator Alcorn. If, as is most likely, both parties seek to complete their tickets in the South, the chances of the Mississippian would seem to be as good as any one's. Mr. Alcorn is a man of large fortune, of irreproachable private character, was a gallant Confederate soldier, and is ambitious. He lives in the heart of the great black belt of the Southwest. What Democrat of the South will be second on the Democratic ticket?

S. W. Dorsey in N. Y. Tribune Interview.

"I THINK at the present time Mr. Blaine's chances of nomination are better than they ever were, but I believe that Gen. Logan and John Sherman will jointly have a majority of the votes of the convention. There may be a repetition of the Cincinnati convention of 1876, when Blaine came so near a nomination, but failed. One thing is certain: Mr. Blaine is too experienced a politician to permit a Gar

field to appear in the National convention from Maine, although Tom Reed is quite equal to the role. I believe that there will be fewer names before the next convention than before any that has been held." "Who will be the Democratic nominee ?" "The brightest politician the Democratic party has—that is, the present governor of the State of New York." "Don't you think Cleveland may be renominated?" "There is not the slightest chance in the world for him. I don't believe he could get a delegation from a single State in the Union. I don't believe now that if he should try to retrieve himself with his party by retracing his steps he could ever regain the Democratic confidence which he has lost. This fellow up here in Albany will cut the life out of him."

Brooklyn Times (Rep.).

HERE in this Kings county stronghold of Democratic disaffection we have witnessed a notable change in the temper of the party to its President since Mr. Hendrix was appointed postmaster, and a few more judicious allotments of patronage of the same kind would suffice to make Cleveland the idol of Kings county Democracy. The social favors that are now being showered on the head of the Kings county leader at Washington show some purpose to counteract the growing strength of the Hill faction, and it must not be forgotten that the President still holds all the trump cards and that he can score a trick for every one of the offices in his gift. Governor Hill is a smart man; he can make himself so solid with the labor unions by the bestowal of a few honorary appointments as to prevent any defection of labor votes from the party if he should gain the nomination, but the labor unions do not nominate Democratic candidates, and Grover Cleveland has a monopoly of the bait by which Democratic conventions are caught.

New York Sun (Dem.).

OUR esteemed contemporary, the Freeman, proposes the following Republican candidates for the next election: "For President, Walter Q. Gresham, of Indiana; for Vice-President, John D. Long, of Massachusetts." This would be a strong ticket, especially now that Governor Long has got married. In 1884 Gresham was Postmaster-General, and we advised the Republicans to nominate him for President, but the idea did not suit their book. There is no man in the Republican party who would make a better President than Judge Gresham; but it is curious how opposed the American people are to transferring judges into political offices. We have known half a dozen ornaments of the Supreme Court who were willing to be President, but the people would never see it. And as for Judge Gresham, it is safe to say that no man thinks less about the Presidency than he, and none will be less disappointed than he as he is left to continue his honorable, useful and high-minded career upon the bench.

St. Louis Post-Dispatch (Dem.).

MR. BLAINE is certainly a man of extraordinary influence in his own party, and his chances for a renomination grow brighter every day. His boasted "magnetism" is shown to be a reality, and there is no good reason for believing that the Republican party is not ready to follow him a second time through the trials of a spirited and spectacular campaign. Two years ago some Republican papers that opposed Blaine's nomination assailed his character and fitness in unmeasured terms; to-day these papers are either silent in reference to him, or give him faint and reluctant praise. When he is adversely criticised by Republican papers, it is usually with apologetic caution. Elaine's popularity among Republicans is still an active, though silent force, and his renomination would not be surprising. He is the exponent and representative of certain tendencies and practices which are peculiarly Republican, and under the existing circumstances he would seem to be an appropriate candidate for his party.

St. Louis Globe-Democrat (Rep.).

THE opposition by prominent journals of his own party to Mr. Cleveland's renomination is strong and pronounced. The Brooklyn Eagle, Cincinnati Enquirer, and New York World and Sun have all expressed their disapproval of any project looking to the putting of the President again in the field. Their antagonism to him is not that he has turned too many Republicans out of office, but that he has turned out too few. But the leading count in the indictment which they bring against him is that he has demoralized and practically disrupted the party. The confidence which was so generally felt two years ago in his ability to mold the Democratic party into a condition of invincibility has been replaced by the knowledge that his ignorance of political affairs and his want of tact in managing men have made the Democracy powerless to institute an aggressive campaign under his leadership.

Brooklyn Eagle (Dem.).

One sentence from Dorsey's "breezy talk" is worth quoting:

I have not been to call on Conkling for the simple reason that I have not the time to spare. If I should call on him he would want me to spend the evening with him and stay all night. That is his way. He wants to sit up with a friend till the wee small hours. I have not the time to spare for that kind of a call.

If Mr. Conkling has more intelligence and taste than some of his jocose or passionate ebullitions in court seem to imply, it would be interesting to know how he likes the close and confidential friendship thus imputed to him. The best thing for Mr. Blaine that has recently occurred is Dorsey's formal declaration that he is "opposed to the renomination" of the Maine candidate in 1888. For a like reason Governor Hill will not be greatly pleased, while the friends of President Cleveland may be correspondingly elated with part of the "breezy" colloquy.

National Republican (Rep.).

Troy Press (Dem.).

The Jewish Messenger (Religious).

Salt Lake Herald (Dem.).

UNDOUBTEDLY Carlisle is among the foremost statesmen of the day, being able, pure and progressive; the Democrats have few men who would be his equal in the Presidential office; but the political history of parties and men should teach him and his friends that the best way to destroy his chances is to announce him as a candidate for the Presidency and "boom" him for the nomination. Long before the convention in 1888, if the boom shall begin now, Mr. Carlisle will have been exhausted and forgotten, and some "unknown," without a record, will step in and pluck the fruit, as Cleveland did in 1884. The Speaker is too good a man to be sacrificed by his ambition or the misguided efforts of his friends. Two years hence will be soon enough to inaugurate a Carlisle boom.

New York Sun (Dem.).

BLAINE and Logan made a pretty ticket, and Blair and Logan would make a beautiful one. Platform: "6 Hang the expense!" Decidedly, if the Democrats are beaten in the Congress elections, the President will have to take his part of the blame. But there is no use in crying for spilled milk before it 's spilled. Let us hope that it won't be spilled. Spilled it will be, though, if the House is not Holmanized. The Providence Journal correspondent wonders if Mr. Cleveland and Mr. Randall are "working together again as they did in the early days of the Administration." We hope so, but just at present the majority of the House Democrats are working together with Mr. Randall and Mr. Holman for economy. Richmond Va., State (Dem.).

BLAINE is at present the hardest working candidate in the country. It is a mistake to suppose that he is idle. Wherever we turn we notice his lines of circumvallation thrown out. Perhaps no man is better aware of this than Mr. Powderly, and hence his manly rebuff of Blaine at the very outset. The thinking man is not to be deceived by promises. He knows that Blaine has for a long time been in politics and that Blaine was for a long time in a position to have rendered some aid to the industrial interests of the country. But did he? It is only when he is a candidate that we hear of his friendship for the laboring man. These are just the men that good citizens ought always to reject.

Chicago Herald (Ind.).

ONE of the most interesting pieces of political gossip that has been circulated recently is that which attributes to the politicians who are in the confidence of Mr. Blaine a purpose to run him for President two years hence on a reunion, protective tariff and liberal appropriation platform, with General John B. Gordon, of Georgia, as the candidate for Vice-President. General Gordon is now, as a part of the alleged scheme, making a canvass for the Democratic nomination for Governor of Georgia, and his success in the convention and at the polls would be regarded as a very important step toward the perfection of the plan.