in the way in the shape of laws or regulations or adopted methods and practices. Of this element Mr. Hill is a recognized representative. Now, it is clear that, if Mr. Hill, as a representative anti-reform man, is this year defeated in this important State of New York, in which last year another Democratic candidate was victorious as a representative reformer, the anti-reform element which seeks to baffle the President's efforts will thereby be materially weakened, and the cause of reform will gain new strength. Mr. Hill ought, therefore, to be defeated.
But we are told that President Cleveland himself is going to vote for the Democratic candidates, Mr. Hill included. This does not change the nature of the case in the least. That he is in a very difficult situation we all know. It is his privilege to regulate his relations with his party in his own way, and it is our business as friends of reform to do our duty to our cause in our way.
It is a gratifying and a significant fact that the Independents in this State, who last year cut loose from their party connections to support Mr. Cleveland for the Presidency, this year, without any previous consultation, simply obeying a common impulse, recognize their duty upon the same principles to support Mr. Davenport for the governorship. But in order to secure to their endeavors, which, it is hoped, will be as successful this year as last, their full effect upon the political situation, it is important that the Independents should not permit their conduct to be misinterpreted.
There has already been much foolish talk in the newspapers about what they call our “change of sides,” our “returning to the fold” and so on. It should be generally understood that there is on our part no change at all, that we are acting upon exactly the same principles this year as last; that upon these principles we should support Mr. Davenport if he were a Democrat and oppose Mr. Hill
