“The Dead Rabbit Democracy”

image 1image 2image 3image 4cropped image 1

“THE DEAD RABBIT DEMOCRACY.”

And who are they? some one exclaims, at once. We will post you up, dear reader.

Be it known, then, that for some years past our democratic friends in these diggins have been diverging, splitting, forking off, (as those heavenly bodies, the comets, sometimes do,) into two parts. From causes too numerous to mention, the most unscrupulous schemers have so far managed as not to give up possession of the party “station-houses,”—and where the party succeeds, the said schemers have succeeded.

There has been a gradual tendency, (who can deny it?) for many years, of all the most abominable elements of city population, toward the little and large caucuses and regencies of the democracy, doubtless because those elements think they can make the most that way. The hungry hordes of office-seekers, the fighting men, the shysters, the proslavery crowders, the Brookses, the invaders in Kansas, and that strange gathering, the Cincinnati Convention of a year ago, with Mayor Wood¹. Alderman Wilson,² &c., in New York city—these now stand as “the party.” They have compelled the others to do homage to them. And they are “the Dead Rabbit Democracy.”

But there is still a passive force in, or alongside of the democratic ranks—not acting with any other. These are the more conscientious men, wishing well to their country, too intelligent to be gulled with the usual claptrap of the kept party organs and spouters—but, from the force of habit, unable to dissever their connection from people who have been their companions so long. This passive force is not “the Dead Rabbit Democracy.”

Brooklyn is pretty well represented in “the Dead Rabbit Democracy.” Its party organ, many of the local managers, and sundry of the office-holders, must be classed in that category. The most marked exception is the Mayor. Evidently he shows no disposition to take his place among the “Dead Rabbits.”

Acute reader! you have but to exercise a little of your own penetration and judgment, to tell who “the Dead Rabbit Democracy” really are—and to separate them from the passive force we have alluded to.

The question comes up, these times: Will the “Dead Rabbits” succeed in forcing the whole of their party, the unwilling ones with the rest, to take sides with them? Will they continue to be the organisation, the regulars—all others forced to cave in,—either to withdraw or else sing hosannas to them and their “issues”?

We shall see how this existing question is decided—only adding here that we have no fears for the final result. Adding also, that we do not think the proofs, so far, warrant placing the name of President Buchanan³ among the mortuary burrowers. Adding also that there is no fit name henceforth for them to be known by but “the Dead Rabbit Democracy.” A special inspiration!

---