Ominous Words from Gen. Grant.
By J. H. Waggoner
PRESIDENT GRANT is not a talkative man; indeed, it has been denied that he can make a speech. But nobody denies that he can think for himself, and act when occasion requires. And his lack of talk gives his words all the more importance. But lately he has disappointed everybody — he has made a speech at Des Moines, Iowa, which has attracted much attention and elicited much comment from the press. The following brief article from the San Francisco Chronicle of Oct. 1, gives a good idea of the speech, and shows what is thought of it :— "WHAT CAN THE PRESIDENT MEAN? "On the 29th of September there was a military 'reunion' at Des Moines, Iowa, on which occasion President Grant was present. Of course he was importuned to make a speech. Speech-making is an invariable and indispensable feature of American 'reunions.' The President, abandoning his usual and characteristic policy of reticence, responded to the call, and made the longest speech recorded against him in all his public career. He commenced by informing his audience that he was going to disappoint those who had called upon him 'in the expectation of getting a short speech.' This is not only the longest, but it also the most sparkling effort in the oratorical line that the President has ever made. 'If we are to have another contest in the near future,' he said, 'for our national existence, I predict that the dividing line will not be Mason and Dixon's but it will be between patriotism and intelligence on one side, and ambition, superstition and ignorance on the other.' The President then proceeded as follows :— "'In this centennial year the work of strengthening the foundation of the structure begun by our forefathers one hundred years ago at Lexington should be begun. Let us all labor for more security of free thought, free speech, a free press, and pure morals, unfettered religious sentiments, and equal rights and privileges of all men, irrespective of nationality, color or religion. Encourage free schools and resolve that not one dollar appropriated to them shall be applied to the support of any sectarian school. Resolve that neither State nor nation shall support institutions save those where every child in the land may get a common school education, unmixed with atheist, pagan, or sectarian teachings. Leave the matter of religion to the family, and keep Church and State forever separate. With these safeguards I believe that the battles which created the army of Tennessee will not have been fought in vain.' "Is this a prediction of a religious war? The whole tenor of the President's remarks seem to indicate that such was his meaning. He declares that the conflict which he foreshadows is not to be a sectional one. It is not to be between the North and the South. It is to be between 'patriotism and intelligence on the one side, and ambition, superstition and ignorance on the other.' How is this language to be interpreted except as a prediction of a religious war?" President Grant is by no means a "sensational" man, and he would never have uttered these words if he did not see indications which warrant them. Evidently the subject of a "religious war" will soon attract the attention of our statesmen.