Personal Abuse

We do not take any stock in this porsonw abuse of presidential candidutus. The republican papen that seek to advanct! the cause of Gen. Garfield by calling Gen. BanooOk a profane brute, a drunkard, and oihi r hard HUM, do more harin tlian good, and place themselves on a leve! wilh the democratie journals that have disgosted many good inenilicis of tlieir part; in the vain attempt to daubour honorci presidential candidate with mul We believe en. Hancock to be a brave soldier, and to have lived a lili' as fice froin sin as falls to the lot of mankind generalij ; but we believe the party whieh he representa has done soino vile deeds. It is not Hancock the republicana are llpUting, but tlie bad party back of him. Itisevery patriota' dcsire that the deaiocratie party shall not come into powor, and by a proper presentation of the issues of the campaign by republicans it is certaiu it cannot, but this personal abuso ot'their candidato is not only in extreme bad taste, but detrimente) to the best interests of the republican party. And it is not our belief that republicunsare so hard pressed ibr arguruents that they need resort to that kind of tactics. This mode of political warfare gives Americans a bad name abroad. Foreigners take ibr grantod that wliat is said of the candidatos on both sides is true, aud that uny pcople wbo would nominate such men lor high pomtioas, are neccs-arily a nation of rascáis. It isu't noers-ary to cali the democratie nomineei villains, blackguards and rasoali. The party they represent lm enoogh vulnerable poiuts to lay before tho pcople to defeat tlicm a thousand times over.