In my opinion, when a thing is right in itself, it will be very apt to turn out, in the end, as the best policy. But as you address me from the standpoint of a Republican, I will, for the sake of argument, in my answer waive higher considerations and ask you to look at this matter from a partisan point of view. I think even the most sanguine Republicans will scarcely question the following facts: The Republican party, in order to succeed in the National election, cannot afford to lose the votes of many of the Northern States. New York is so far in the hands of the Democrats; likewise Connecticut; Ohio was last fall carried by a majority of 5000 in a poll of 500,000, and that majority included the whole independent vote; Indiana is strongly inclined to be Democratic; of Illinois neither party is sure; in Wisconsin the Republicans last fall lost their whole State ticket with the exception of the governor who was elected by a very small majority, owing to his personal popularity with certain classes of Democrats in Milwaukee; California and Oregon you cannot count upon with certainty. Probably not one of these States can the Republicans expect to carry without the support of all, or at least a large majority, of those who of late years have acted independently of party control.
Now, suppose this independent element, through some organ of opinion, informs you that such support can be secured to the Republican party only by a quite satisfactory assurance of a genuine and thorough reform of the Government, in the shape of nominations of a certain character, and that, if such satisfactory assurance be given, the support and coöperation will be hearty and active; would it be quite wise or patriotic on the part of Republicans to say: “It cannot be denied that the thing they ask for is in itself most just and desirable; but their asking for it is a piece of impudence and an attempt at dictation which must be resented, and therefore it shall
