To the Editor of The Registïh Sir:- I have noticed a tendency in Republican speakers thus far during the present campaign, to confine the discussion to the tariff. No doubt the question of protection versus free trade does affect the material prosperity of the American people more immediately than any other, and, in the judgment of the writer, the ascendency of protection is necessary to the prosperity of our people. This question, however, is one of financial expediency only, and if the American DeoDle have nonervethat can thrill higher than the pocket nerve they are in a bad way. If ruin were brought upon the country by opening our markets to the products of pauper labor, and throwing our own people out of employment, the people would be quick to see their mistake and when they had reversed their action, in a few yearsprosperity would return. But, if honest elections were overthrown, and the faith of the people in popular government were gone with them, it would take years and sorrow which no man can number or foresee, to repair the mischief. Will any onesay thatthereis no danger of this? Indeed, it seems to me that the danger is great and imminent. It is notonous, acknowieagea, in iaei, by the organs and leaders of the dominant party throughout the south, that a whole race, in several states the majority of thepeople, are disfranchised there in defiance of the law of the land. They teil us that these are negroe., and not fit to vote ; but all our rights hang together onder the same law ; and, besides'it is practically not race nor fitness that determines whether the political rights of the voter in that section shall be respected or not, but the safe ascendeney of the oligarchy in power there. The most notorious political murders in the south have been of white men, many of them pouthern tnpn. And in many parts of the south no party, under any name or for any purpose whatever, has been allowed to threaten the ascendency of the party that goes by the name of democratie there without encountering a degree of intolerance that never hesitated tocommit murder when other measures could not be made more effective. Lately, on the eve of an election which had been promised ehould be fair and free, alarmed by the opposition which this promise of safety seemed likely to cali out, Louisiana's governor sent. out his orders that a safe majority should be counted for the democratie candidates, no matter how the votes should be cast, and got a majority larger than the poll Hst in inany precincts. Then a senator from that s'ate rises in congress to teil us that all this is none of our business. In the south, whose methóds were developed, and whose leaders wereeducated under slavery, perliaps this sort of thing was to be expected until a generation can be educated to liberty and self-government and impartial justice, but how can we fail to see that this state of things is a perpetual danger, and tbat the safety of popular governmentrequires that the oligarchy which rules by such methods shall be beaten and kept in an hopeless minority in the councils of the naüon, and that perpetually until freedom and iustice can be established among them, whether that takes 20 years or 100 ? It is not sectional antagonism, nor bitternesgfrom the war, which demandsthis; it is not thebloody shirt, but patriotism and common sense. Yetthis oligarchy constitutes the principal efifective forcé of the democratie party, depended on for its whole strength in every estímate of the party's chances. Is the character and tendency of that party in the north any better than in the south ? Let us see. We see the democratie party in New York fighting with all its might against the enactment or enforcement of any law to make the fraudulent manipulation of elections difncult or impo8sible, and its democratie governor finally vetoing such a law when his party was notable to prevent its enactment. We have seen the same disposition manifested by that I party in Ohio, and also some intimation I of it in Michigan. But Bome of its other acts wm ïllustrate its tendency even more forcibly. Let us say here that criminal conduct on the part of a member of any party does not taint that party, unless the party endorses and consents to proflt by the crime; then it does. About four years ago in the city of Cincinnati, one Muilen, an officer in the city pólice department, on the eve of an election, arrested 113 Republicans and held them i prisoners until the polls were closed. He was afterward arrested, tried and imprisoned for the crime, and even bis attorney could find no excuse and make no plea for him except he was the tooi of greater crimináis than himself. Did the Democratie party endorse that crime? Let us see. The governor of the state, then a democrat, headed a petition to the president of the United States for his pardon. Many prominent democrats signed it. The democratie president pardoned him ; he was refeased, and almost imrnediately his fellow democrats glorified him by putting I him at the head of their delegation from the city of his crime to their state convention." He was promuted for it. Soon from the same locality we have another example of the political moráis of the democratie party. In order, if possible, to end their man to the senate in opposition to the will of a large majority of the people of Ohio, this party changed poll lists, forged returns, and shamelessly issued certificates of election to eight of their candidates for the state legislature who were defeated. They also tried the same game in the city of Columbus. Then every democrat in that legislature engaged in filibustering to prevent the ousting o these usurpers and to secure their privilege of voting on their own cases, anc by their aid to elect one of the lead ing crimináis of their gang to the sen ate. This they carried to the verge o revolution.and nearly every democratie paper in the United States supported them. I Later, the same party tried the same tactics in Indiana. The crimináis were flnally convicted, but the democratie party defended them and obstructed the course of jusdce at every step. A few years ago, 1878, or 1879, 1 believe, the same party in the state of Maine attempted to install theraselves ín power by changing the returns of an election. They carried their high-handed proceedings so far that a gatling gun was mounted in the capítol at Augusta, and actual war was prevented only by General Chamberlain who, as a military necessitv usurped authority and held all parties still by force of arms until the machinery of the courts could be brought to bear in the case. Then ït was unanimouslydecided by thejudges that these democrats had not one legal pointto justify their conduct; but the democratie papers all over the country endorsed these revolutionists with enthusiasm throughout the whole ele. Four years ago the same party perpetrated forgeries on election returns ia Chicago, for which convictions were obtained. Less than a year ago tliey drilled their cohorts to defeat the law by a trick and put them in a position to manipúlate an election in Detroit. In fact from Maine to the Pacific and from the lakes to the gulf, we have instances too numerous to attract attention, proving tliat the democratie party Bticks at no crime which canpossibly be turned to political uses ; that it cares nothing for right but seeks only, by any means and all means, to put itself in power and control the government. Now, Mr. Editor, m view oí mese facts, what oueht the people of the United'States to do ? What can they do with safétj-, but defeat the democratie party ? The ascendency of that party is the overthrow of government by the people. lts very name is a fraud. Instead of government by the people they are giving us a government by an oligarchy, whose power is obtained in a competitive test of efficiency in crime. Instead of the best form of government on earth, is not this the worst ? It is not long since men were ready to sacrifice both wealth and life "that government of the peop]e. by the people and for the people might notperish from the earth ;" andDrovedtheir readiness on a thousand battle fields. Is not the same issue at stake now ? What is wealth to compare with this? lam one of those who believe with a full conviction that material prosperity and patriotism pull together in this case ; but if I were a free trader I should still be a republican. I could no more be anything else than I could, if at sea, with bright hopes and happy prospects for the future, see with indifierence the ship ecnttled in which I was sailing.