d examine the declaration,
brief or plea of his opponent. He has sought for technicalities,
to the end that he might veto these bills. By this course he has
lost the soldier vote, and there is no way by which he can regain
it. Upon this point I regard the President as exceedingly weak.
He has shown about the same feeling toward the soldier now that he
did during the war. He was not with them then either in mind or
body. He is not with them now. His sympathies are on the other
side. He has taken occasion to show his contempt for the Democratic
party again and again. This certainly will not add to his strength.
He has treated the old leaders with great arrogance. He has cared
nothing for their advice, for their opinions, or for their feelings.

The principal vestige of monarchy or despotism in our Constitution
is the veto power, and this has been more liberally used by Mr.
Cleveland than by any other President. This shows the nature of
the man and how narrow he is, and through what a small intellectual
aperture he views the world. Nothing is farther from true democracy
than this perpetual application of the veto power. As a matter of
fact, it should be abolished, and the utmost that a President should
be allowed to do, would be to return a bill with his objections,
and the bill should then become a law upon being passed by both
houses by a simple majority. This would give the Executive the
opportunity of calling attention to the supposed defects, and
getting the judgment of Congress a second time.

I am perfectly satisfied that Mr. Cleveland is not popular with
his party. The noise and confusion of the convention, the cheers
and cries, were all produced and manufactured for effect and for
the purpose of starting the campaign.

Now, as to Senator Thurman. During the war he occupied substantially
the same position occupied by Mr. Cleveland. He was opposed to
putting down the Rebellion by force, and as I remember it, he rather
justified the people of the South for going with their States.
Ohio was in favor of putting down the Rebellion, yet Mr. Thurman,
by some peculiar logic of his own, while he justified Southern
people for going into rebellion because they followed their States,
justified himself for not following his State. His State was for
the Union. His State was in favor of putting down rebellion. His
State was in favor of destroying slavery. Certainly, if a man is
bound to follow his State, h