The Montgomery Advertiser, the pro
prietor of which is the newly appointed
postmaster of Montgomery, indulges in
some singular comments on The Consti
tution's recent editorial on William L.
Yancey.
Because we indirectly paid a tribute
to the great southern leader, after cor
recting The Boston Herald's statement
that he was in congress immediately
before the war, The Advertiser proceeds
to say:
Upon reading aIG this if will occur to every
one 'to ask why The Constitution after so
lauding .Mr. Yancey as a leader does not fol
low his methods? If it believes what, lit
says of the corrupt -and republican domina
tion of the democratic party, it is clear that
the party is not 'worthy of its support. Should
it Jiot follow its model, and throw aside the
trammels of parly allegiance? In such an
attitude would it not be more successful in
shaping southern sentiment?
It is unnecessary to say that The Con
stitution has never spoken of “the cor
rupt ami republican domination of tin*
democratic party.” All that is in the
imagination of our contemporary. We
have protested against the democratic
majority in congress following the lead
ership of John Sherman and Tom Reed,
and we h ive called attention to the sig
nificant concentration of federal patron
age in certain quarters where there have
been notable recent conversions to the
gold standard. 'That is the sum and sub
stance of the basis of Tin* Advertiser's
comment.
