THE ANTI- POLYGAMY BILL. V
The twin relic cannot complain of its an- cient guardan— the Democratic party. Never was ward endowed with beauty and riohes more gallantly watched, tended and defend- ed by a guardian of marriageable age. As the practice of polygamy was instituted dur- ing the golden period of Democratic rule, it is not unnatural that its abolishment should be delayed by a filibustering Democratic minority in Congress. Hence the sqene in the House on Tuesday, when Mr. Haskell en- deavored to bring the anti- polygamy bill to a'vote.
What will strike the unsophisticated youth of the laud with surprise is the unanimous declaration on the part of the Democrats that there is not one of their number in the House who is not opposed to polygamy, or who is not in favor of its abolition. Yet nearly every Democrat present united to defeat the motion to pass upon the measure. Nobody who knows Mr. Randall will hesitate to de- clare that he has no sympathy with the evil or fellowship with such as propagate it. Yet Mr. Randall appeared as the defender of that evil, simply because it is the policy of his party to obstruct, to hinder, to cause delay, and to impress upon all legislation the Demo- cratic sign manual. The lesson of Tuesday is to the youth of the country, who should take notice of the tactics of partisan leaders and govern themselves accordingly. They will observe that the Democrats, under the lead of Randall, Springer, Blackburn and others, entered upon exactly the same course they so vigorously denounced when it was pursued by a Republican minority in the House while Mr. Randall was Speaker, and his colleagues in the minority were leaders of a majority.
The uusophisticated youth of the land may ask why, if the policy of obstruction by the minority in Congress be wrong when that minority happens to be Republican, it is not also wrong when the minority happens to be Democratic ? They may inquire why, if Mr. Randall denounced filibustering by a Repub- lic ( in minority, he now resorts to exactly the same doubtful tactics, being a leader of a minority? What answer can Mr. Randall make to such inquiries ? Clearly, he must admit that circumstances alter cases, and that whether sauce for the goose shall be sauce for the gander depends altogether upon whether the goose and the gander change places. They seem to have exchanged places, and the strident gander now grows angry and indignant when the late gander, turned goose, insists on common rations.
But it is to the credit of Republicans that they have never obstructed the passage of measures for the suppression of great public wrongs and crimes. The Democrats filibus- tered to delay the abolition of slavery, the amendments to the Constitution, the laws to vitalize and enforce those amendments, and now they filibuster to delay the abolition ot polygamy. The youth of the country will take notice, and when exhorted to cast in their lot with Democracy, put the questions suggested by these ^ facts to the exhorters. Of course they will get no answers, but they can put the questions.
