Newspaper Page Text
PLAQUEMINE, IBERVILLE PARISH, LA., SEPTEMBER 1, 1860. ýýý.eý " entnel. ADDRESS TO THE DEMOCRACY AND a THE PEOPLE OP TIHE UNITED STATFS, BY THE NATIONAL DEMO- ti CRATIC EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE. o NaTrroa Dlamoric F.xcn=r r Uewwzn Rooms, d 2 4 Street. Washmngton Cty, July, I0. f a To the Demoeracy and the People of the a r's;t"d Stnte.--FtLLow-CITlzrr r s-The elec- ii tion of the next President and Vice President n of the United States is at hand. Four distinct organizations are in the field. The Republi- v can party making bold and open war upon the p institutions of fifteen sovert'ign States of this v Union. The Constitutional Union party, re- fi pudiating all platforms and standing simply t1 on the catch words "Constitution and the a Union." Two parties, each calling itself I Democratic; one, however, following the for tunes of one man, Mr. Douglas, and differing fom the Republicans in making insiduous, instead of open war upon the South. The other, standing inflexibly on the Constitution ( ef the country, makes no concealments as to lIt interpretation of that instrument, its rally- d cry being the equality of the States. We i , calmly and impartially, to survey the I , and to give the reasons why the latter y should be considered as the Democratic f party, and how the dearest interests of coun try, race, and of human progress, are con- t seraed in its success. s Why is it that the Democratic party is dis- C rpted, and its wings arrayed in bitter opposi tin to each other? Why is it that the vet- t mans who achieved its time-honored triumphs C no longer move with the old energy and har mony to meet the antagonists they have'so e~iea defeated? What firebrand has been thrown into their midst, lighting up intestine bres, and consuming as with a devouring 1 Same? Let the plain, unvarnished record C answer. in 1856 the Democratic party, alter a most c htter contest, elected James Buchanan Presi- t dot, and John C. Breckinridge Vice Presi dust of the United States. The new adminis tlion was inaugurated and went into opera tie. Its policy was foreshadowed in the I ugural address. The Supreme Court, in a an before it, the Dred Scott case, gave its de eltla on the question of difference in the I nemocratic ranks-adecislea whil previously eay Democrat had solemnly pledged himself baNide by, as the authoritative exposition of I *s Democratic faith. That august tribunal Yduded the Missouri Compromise act uncon 1lbional and void; enunciated the right of ro oauth to take and hold their slave property I i the territories; denied to the Territorial lgidlature any right to interfere with such alry, ad proclaimed that a territory only settle the quetioa of slavery atthe tlue it came to form a Constitution, prepara to its admission into the Union as a sory State. was looked upon by alln sound Demo- 4 a as the Anal settlement of the question, I al it was believed that the agitation of svery would be forever withdrawn from the ll of at(greea. Who has kept up this agi- I Itat ? Who has resisted this decision? Who ha declared that: "It matters not what way I he Supreme Court my hereafter decide as to the abract question, whether slavery may or S at go Into a territory under the Copati the people have the lawful means to iaedaes or echude it, as they please." And, Win: "No'dmtter what the decision df the S apems Court may be oi that abstract qgoe toh M right of ti people to make a slave I -rrltsy, or a bee trtiey, is perfect and Iemphunde thsNeeftkabAl' Mr. Doug le th ,la his Illiaed oontust, at the people shove the Coastitloe, sad violat4d his own phdgeis the sa eas Nebraska act. Now w mented to the country the ad Iect of tur once valiant ehsappon exert I his sis energies to overthrow the party hat Lso onored him; sad with the 4ag of rebelioan ad Iniurrealisa i his hbad, ea da vria, to sed the party from its prind p Hif rleaude ayin t tate to sda i-l s wilth thle pup a pnrty to compass his ls. In Oregon thy nited with the aepub lase in the canvs i art and this, and e Mr. Lops, the ei Republican of that Skis, f t the uratess on the doctrine of SAqster owva gaad, e. TIn New Jersey hfis iads, Mvers. a and Rgs were Mtornedto Coongrea by the oltes5dthe *Re ~Plis parte , ai d b r!;w rth k Dem-an Sthwsrta it Penrsylvsaia; with Johns . I;vis i aIndiana. epblicans were returned n Caongres over Demoerats b the opposition, "nl with the colamio of t Mends of Mr. e. Thus . rwpmlad defeated in Con Mi, GUlles,and wart in BIvsaja, hall ak- n ri in bl , W e ad ew uesy. Mr. Dougla s hielf, all the wkle, in vema dly ad denounced the umeersate * - tthe Usemte; has - e t he pim d by the vlee of his ~haswagad a aBL his Demmatineal -- tllrm . m~dr~~in te heie e~et ta:rL'-~irr ts theate he two Y ~ s n iorhae to the e ,he where the party was in possesion of the gov- to ernment. Is it to be wondered at that the abl South became alarmed ; and that it lostits con- sut idonce in him who once was by them trusted thi and admired ? me It must be remembered, too, that the (resis- we tance to Mr. Douglas' nomination was not cal confined to the Southern States. It was wide- ing spread throughout all the States, and was pr- ag dominant in Oregon, California, Penmsylvania da and New Jersey-States whose votes, with an bel almost united South, were essential ta success in the coming election. It was also ?redonmi- Rt nant in Massachusetts. Under such circumstances were his claims po vehemently urged for the Presidency. The wh press, telegraph, and every art of management his was used to secure the election of delegates nis favorable to his nomination. The maxim of Vi the immortal Jackson was reversed, and the I man was made to seek thb. Presidene., not the tut Presidency the man. re THu CnHARLSTOX CONVNTIOS . i Heretofore, the delegates chosen by the De- ft mocracy of the United States met inNational th Conventions as brothers, to consult together sag mn a spirit of harmony and concession-to lay wh down the principles of the party, ant to nom- late inate candidates for the Presidency ad Vice Presidency, not objectionable (in numbers) to Co any respectable portion of the party, sad there- as fore likely to receive its united an4 harmo- de nious support. For this purpose, walthe two third rule adopted in the first National Demo- me cratic Convention that was ever het in this alhi country ; and actuated by the motive which cs begot it, the Democracy have repeatedy in Na tional Conventions, whenever a repectable w' a opposition presented itself, refused to nominate some of its ablest statesmen, and by tie nomi- 1 nation of others less objectionable have des marched on to victory, and the deveopment not and enforcement of their prianlles. It will cer be recollected that Mr. Van Burea ved a Tb considerable majority at the Democ a- not tional Convention in 1844, yet no othn qua contended that he, therefore, was entiled to ity. the nomination. On the contrary, tb Con- sae vention, regarding the opposition of te mi- we nority to his nomination as entitled tooonsid- as Seration and respect, refused to nominee him, of but nominated Mr. Polk, (against whe there ga was no objection,) and under his banter, the ere Democratic party achieved one of itgreatest rem triumphs. It was this principle of krmony te and concession of respect and coesideationfor as f the opinions and views of the minorit, which lea f bound the Democrcy together with ands of wh 1 steel, and made them invincible on tb day of letl battle. It was the talismanic mete under pla f which we marched to victory-the set and not the key-stone to our success. dat Far diferent was the spirit dispyed at wa Charketon and Baltimore by the rd, of pi Mr. Douglas. They came to nominatrdim, or I break up the Oonvention. Many f their fit prominent me. boldly and openly avad the at purpuse-"Rule or rain," was temotte day They met the opinions and views of e av- n Seteen reliable Democratic States, aladst uni- 1 ted in opposition to the nomination >f Mr. jon f Douglas, with insult and derision. , Mo The Democratic States were wedded t one it i man. They had their favoites, but put cra Sfobrth no claim that even one of them oud vi be nominated. They were willing to tas any pee , one of the illustrious and dtinp ishe4ates- A r mes of or party, spt Mr.De M I He had made himself obaoxious to them + the · reasonsalready mentioned, and they asktthat ' he should not be thrust down their thts. the Was the requestan unusual one? Our ry Sasa party shows that t was not. WM the a request an uareasonable one? Who w ay ve 1 so, when they releet that upon the s friM e Swhlb made it, chiefly devolved the tad of aeletn t nB aominees of the Convenba? I Yet the Dougs delegates not only t a d deaf ear to this request, but in the maost C handed and reckless manner with sacrihu . hands tore down te dmrk of thd id and trampled upon comity Ood usages, in order to foist one nas upon e Ye Convention. With any other Democrat tfiy - could have had harmny and union and ba sented to-day the spectacle of a united and - st , vincible party. We put it to the consciee gal and the judgment of every honest man, M a they notuilty of settin up this one ma a t paramon4 to the unio of the 8tates! A f te not gauilty of having divided the pat th DI dthey not thus take the st, fa lab e irrvoable stride towards diusion of tl a States " From this unenviable position a as ingenuity an devia, ner wholesale and rees Me Sless charges othes, can relieve thear d "Inexorable i " Ismps the grave pdl . pon their e ispse ingM tates,. m+ d a of which were Black. (o ,ran the cimede .dictate both the piltarm and the esdidas,l St and to this end tee r a of tactis, which we ,r had.witnesed outside of the Convention, was, for the first time in our history, (and we ear 1 neatly bape tbe 15) sturifly and prliently ented in it, meade and violated , at pleasre. The dedisions of Imnpartil e Presidet were adepted, and thebn ovwrrled, a as sulted thelr srpoe The usagof DIm its o atic s were followed, and them l s wemelallyr , as it accorded with their s- e r peat plWpqrIriri Wbt.thi aep d a sth nminati onat. Do( It- It cannot ir earlinly be coidered steange ttemork a , ro maen, asued to moc sones, dould leave th a. Olvention, and that it was nally virtually brokes up The irst set iauistee wea wa WI U tIs. o , The CoU SoU I r-t( Ogt alaUI tio a dthitt erdl risetl 11sIbMsCveamtluan w C Slielvoto a YIi iven, *6 Cmonent wI d Seeglals at each dm oselegi4sltoe M c tdii last role uarn l violadtes p eOe arueo.r ab e..reanm, wIsk a a t odehem iew the tik should he aestriet d htbefollowles masser: At ihefisat a g I *; e F te e.oisue. wheen 1W ussma WS a tW dieshausdg elrf$ to an informal meeting in the morning, to en able the chairman to make out the reprt and submit it to the committee for its approval. At Co this latter meeting, when some six or eight DF members of the committee opposed to the rule : were absent, not having received notice of a ('o ealled meeting for other business and regard- del ing the work as virtually flnished, the rule was wl again brought forward and adopted. In this rr, disrespectable manner was this rule brouoght tri before and adopted by the convention. By it the votes of the minoritv, in tilhe dle gations of Indiana. Vermont, New York and i 1 Ohio, amounting to 27~, or .,; delegates op- Iti posed to Mr. Douglas, were throwu fur himnt; th while on the final ballot, at Baltimore, it ga\e I n him votes in Massachusetts, 10; Pennsylva- on nia, 10; New Jersey, 2" ; Maryland, 2 : 4 Virginia, 3: North Carolina, 1: Arkansas, ý. !I: Missouri. 4~; Tennessee, 3 ; and Kenm- rcý, tucky, 3; in all 41, which he would not have no received` had the ancient usages and rules of Di the former Conventions., leaving the majority AT in each State to determine how the vote of the thi State should be cast, been adhered to. Yet mi the ink was hardly dry that recorded the pas sage of the resolution, before the very men ib who clamored for its adoption, sought to vio- an late it, and actually succeeded in their efforts ! rel In the case of New Jersey, where the State fr, Convention recommended the delegates to vote as a unit, the Douglas delegates overruled the decision of the President that by the term re commended the Convention had provided the the .mode for casting the vote of the State, and pu allowed the two or three Douglas delegates to pu cast their individual votes. Es WITIHDRAWAL OF DELEGATES FROM THEll CHARLESTON CONVENrION. th, The record of proceedings shows this with- e., drawal was done in sorrow and not in anger; Th not for the purposes of disunion, but to re- U, ceive instructions from their constituents. 1s The friends of Mr. Douglas at least, should del not complain. Words, however, are inade- Co quate to express the bitterness of thier animos- as ity. Had not the Democracy of the South the rul same right to State the terms upon which they svi would hold fellowship with their sisterState, 1 to as Douglas had to dictate to them the platform b;y of their Democracy ? The Southern States we gave their interpretation of the Danocratic vet creed, and a portion of them insisted upon its I up recognition by the Convention as the condi- en: ten of their support. They werp denied this up, and withdrew from the Convention. They at mi least did nothing more than pursue the course lib which Mr. Douglas announced in his Dorr letter he would pursue in the event of his va platform not being adopted; for, if he could ver not stand on a different platform as a candi to date, it logically followed that his posittin les was that of antagonism and resistance bo' to uni platform and candidate. as But, notwithstanding the withdr-wal of Ifty-one delegates, no nomination was made at Charleston; and, after a str.gtl of ten days, an adjournment was had co Baltimore, Ex under the following resoluti~ d: Resoled, lhat when thi Convention ad journsitadjourn tore-ase-blest Baltimor fnt Monday, the 18th day or June next, and t of it is respectfully recommended to the Demo cratic party of the several States to make pro- Te vision for supplying aR vacancies in their te- our pective elegations to the Convention when it Iret shall re-assemble." to nALaouN coxNVnTION. the The Convention met at Baltimore. Most of fr the States responded to the invitation above gal recited, and their delegates presented their of eteatials, and asked admission into the Con- aul veation. How were they treated by the the friends of Mr. Douglas? to 0o0t1s D tlEoATs8--xMAsAcAl5ttT. Ott Bes E Hallett was regularly appointed tio a dslIetefroe Massachusetts to the National Mi Coweve m the same Convention appointed s K. L. e s his alternate. Owng to the Sickiness, r. Hallett was unable to attend the Convention at Charlsston, and, is his abeence, s Mr. Chaee, his alternate, took his place. At ,, Baltimore, however, Mr. Hallett was present, ha but the Convention actually turned him out l el aetnally turned out the regular delegate, and re( gave the seat to the dltrnmae ! MIxen*e . M The same course was adopted i. regard to N, the Eighth isetonr District of Missouri. Vy . Johnson B. Gadner the reglar delegate, M as uecaemsiealusy erted out of his seat. t l gasd Mr. O'Plle, the contingent, voted in. Cc Heretofore It has always been comaidered that N the alternate acted only in the absence of the N priael l, bat this cOavestles gravely deter- p, mind that the true test frtssion into that N Convention consisted in an affirmative answer V to the question, are you for the nomination of V SStephen A. Duglas ! A LOUISIANA AND ALABAMA. L The next step was to vote out the regular A `elegation from the State of Louisiana, whoa E re.-linted to Baltimore by the Con eae it t originally appointed them, as Ses to excude the regular delegates fZr 5 mwho wJe appuDted ya new Co- 11 teation called by the Democrataic Committee Sthe 8tate. The history of thecases isthis. fter the seeestion at tc,'harleston, the Demo ae Central Committee of Louisiana, the oily asalatmo in Lthat State having the power Sassemmble the iDemocsac in Convention, eated together the State o'onvention, repr.- ii semting drOy eounty ti the 8tatse, and that ti SClRetabem 4ppointed the same deletes to a Batimore. A few irresponsible men .called sl aLer Convention, at which the Democracy ofe State were pt remsented. In the cas s of lshbea s a esocrata Centraloanommt- w t teled a s new Conventies, to be eleeWed by ,. Demeest ehe gwersl eanatis. 'This a SCaents met, and senat beah the regtar a Ide t,,o Baltimore. Smber ofb pthorsn a , issaed a call, lmb labed Jn only three am ppsn thoe Sat, edd lad o the c Sio.e Dsdsoerscy of Abhbnan, for I t COceation, which met and appointed a set of d edItms, the leader of whom never cast a - eeatic vote in his Ife, and who openly a I r sr. i orIi to break e the D-s , mr- " I Ye s-eatled Nttea A5:KANt5SA<. thi in the ca. i.' f Ar!:ansa, th., Conegresdioral Conventions of the State which nglinated the NS Demr'nrtic eandidatct' for CongF ,. re-ap- lut pointed the dilegate. to Baltimore. Yet this r Convention deliberately voyted out the regular delegates so elected in the Ftrs# District: no' while they declared tlhat the. regular delegates, old eefsed in the .,.t~ce ,iocer,', in the Second Die- OIU trict, were crtitled to thcir seats and tlhen in Co detiance of the, r-c-luti,!n of the D)emocratic Slate Convention tlf Arkansas ir,.tructing the ae delegate- to vote, as i unit, and in utter viola- in tion of their enr unit resolution, they divided 1ls2 the vote 4,f the State, giving the bogus dele- cl Sgates tfrm the First District the right to cast to one vote. and the regular delegates from the Wa Second District two votes; nay, they even 't went FPrther, and resolveu that, in case the die regular delegates from the 'econd District did t not vote. thce xgus delegates from the First k District were t, cast the full vote of the State: vol And yet, after such high-handedl procedure as wN this, we are meekly told by the Dougias Ctm. to mittee that "it must be conceded that the re- hae port of the Committee on Credentials was so tat liberal and conciliatory toward the seceders thi and their friends as to, be hardly just to the itis represenctatives of the National Democracy by frmn this State !" bet e KOROIA. all In the ceae of Georgia, the Douglas ment themselnes called a State Convention for the tiL purpose of havin:g the seceding delegates re- in pudiated by the Democracy of that State. ths Every shade of the Democratic party of the rio State particlpated in the election of delegates. Mt The Convention met. and uplon taking a vote, Ilac the seceding or regular delegates were sent the back to Baltimore, by a vote of 291 td 41. vol The forty-one Doulglas delegates then Iolted, wh mad also appointed delerates. Yet the Doug las Committee on Credentials at Baltimore, in defiance again of the ree,hlution of the G.( orgia res Convention instructing the-ir delegates to vote tioe as a unit, and in utter violation of their own of rule upon the subject, reported in favor of di- wa viding the vote of the State, giving one'-half tor to the regular delegates, and one-half to the bogus appointees of the 41 bolter, ! But this g was too great an outrage even for this eon vention, and thus placed the brand of boqus upon the brow eof H. V.. Jhnson, the Douglas _t candlidatq f r Vice Prgident: Commenting not upon this action, the Douglas Executive Com mittee 'taracteriaes it as aa "extravagance of Ch libereat'y :te ¶teus was the Democracy of sovereign Stajfi vantonlv ditfranchied.l in a Natioejb lled l vention, and thu, wer. Dednaim .o regard- eve to give up all feilow'u". s elth wolfeare and diev les of their on ..1 , the welfare and div unity ot th, Democratic parts. den -.L reo'OLA cO"T fO.MiNATgE l BY A TWO THBIaDN VOTI. a Bat it is claimed that M1r. Doeglas ,ras Chi nominat&ed by a two-thirds rote. The Douglas Chl Executive Committee. in a recent address, the declare : SAfter all secession', as well as the refusal of certain delegates from Georgia and Arkan- the -s, together with the entire delegations from tni Texas and 'Mississippi to occupy their seats, our National Convention at Baltimore yet (20 retained 424 delegates. or 212 electoral votes :; be-ing ten more than two-thirds of the elec toral votes of the whole Union. Put some of these dle-gates (as in the case of Georgiafe frained from voting, the' majority of the dele- the gation having retired; others, (as in the case t1de of Arkansas) although ffil delegations, and wit authorized, in case of any secession, to cast the whole vote of their State, prefelred only to east that which would be' a fair proportio w between the seceders and thtmselves: and yet wb others (as in the case of Delaware, and por- tre tions of the delegates from Kentucky and Missouri) declined to vote, but refused to till secede. This acriunts for the fact that uponon the second ballot, by States, Mr. Douglas del received only 111l votes; Mr. Breekinridge sat receiving 104, Mr. Guthrie 4 votes, the States cot of South Carolina (eight) and Florida (three) rem having authorized no delegates to any Wtan- the vention at Baltimore. Here is the ballot as of record l,1 Breekinriiles. Guthrie. Dolasi . M aine.................. ... . .. New Hampshire.... ... ... 6 Vermont............. ... 6 I Mssatbusett........... ... 10 Rhode Island............ 4 " Connecticut........... 1 ... 34 Wi New York.«........ .. ... :1 b New Jersey........ .. he Pennsylvania ....... 10 21 10 Maryland............... ... 2 Virginia ............... . f8 North Carolina....... I Alabama ............... ... Lodisiassa............ ..... ... 6 Arkansas................ ... 1 M issouri ............... ... ... Tennessee ............ Kentucky .......... ... 14 .. ihio..................... 23 Indiana............. 13 Illinois.......: 11 Michkan............. 6 ti Wisconsin .... 5 ti Iowa.................- . - 4 t Minnesotd.......... . 4 On motion of Mr. Clark of Miimouri, at the instjbee of MM . Id~ge of Virginia, the ques Stis was then propomded from the ChakO, T whether the nomimatic of Desuglas skmh r I should not be, without farther cersamoey, the amaninemos t of the Convention, ad of .l s a the delegates present; the Chairman distndlcly e -l qesting that any daelegat who 4ebjW E r(iether ow not bhaving se l ,ahond yr SLb'dissent. Nod delegdismseatd adths, d r at last, was Stepben A. Detsgiselh*ot1Y Snoisated in a convention r presentttng me a than two-thirds of all the eletral vots, asthe e c andidatu of the, Dpaqpc rty lr ,t the SPresidency ef p 4 States.. a f Was it iresemlq tt so kpmF a esadidate? s a It so, LewIm Oas w irrautrly nominated u y at Baltlmree ianlSi, whic)h no man ever .t ise~ haa" • : . I . It is. am trea that Oe. "Ou was SMesuaattsd' it:184 a sI a milair "mmer.w I seek p th-l, ~s ds lato of a eDal 4~qipaths Vis.. h* we. l**l* Iv*-' thirds of the Convention, where there Gul 1 was a contest, never before was witnessed in a ress e National Democratic Convention. This reo- i nee I lution was another innovation upon Demo- lots eratic usages. allu r Serond. It is not true that the Chairman offe I notified the delegates that those who did not vot objec.t should be counted as voting for the res- at t ' olution. No published proceeding of that " Convention puts any such remark into his A. mouth. On the contrary, every published pro- Pre ceeding, including those published at the time I in the Baltimore, Washington, and New York to 1 j papers, reported by different reporters, con- I clusively demonstrates that he gave utterance una t to no ~such language. But, even if he did, it Pre was not in his power, and was not within the and scope of his duties as a presiding officer, to dictate to delegates what course they should in t 1 ipurue. as to bind them by his mere ipsedirit. greo t Each delegate had the right to vote, or not to I vote, as to him seemed proper; and of this he Ihe was thes sole iudge, answerable for his course cho to his constituency alone. The Convention ast had decided that, in accordance with the es- chl tabli.-hed usages of the party, it required two- I thirds (2r2 votes) of the electoral votes to now- take inate. The-highest vote at any time attained (in by Mr. Douglas was 181?, and the whole num- y ber cast 196'Jt. How were 202 votes for Mr. the Douglas to be manufactured out of 196 votes war all told, 14) of which were cast against him " ros Eighteen delegates remained in the Conven- Vic tion as spectators, taking no part whatsoever rote in its deliberations, and expressively declaring say that they were not bound by its decision. Va- so rious devices were tried to compel these 18del egates to vote. Mr. Church of New York, had offered a resolution declaring Mr. Douglas' t the nominee, when he had received only 1731 gat' votes. We quote the following proceedings cast " which then ensued: to t1 " The question was loudly called for. a to "Mr. Jones of Pennsylvania, said he was by I ready to support the nominee of the Conven- mat tion when he shall be nominated by the rules Ar of the Democratic party. At Charleston it tO was determined that two-thirds of all the elec f toral college was necessary to a nomination. hoU " It was objected that debate was not in or- voth der. the "The President (Mr. Todd) so ruled. Stet "Mr. Jones raised a question of orde the -that the rule adopted at CharLe ' not be repealed except oa.vm tie action at "Mr. Churebha his resolution was in- Stats Charlesto,angetheruleof iastrutionadopted vote. teq4larlest. New York had come here to Al pour oil on the troubled waters, and had faith- eor fully endeavored to do so. They had yielded in everything exe le ! honor to heal the divisions which id. le proceeded tocon- the demn the action of the seceding delegates. - Mr. W. S. Gittings of Maryland, entered s a protest against the propositions of Mr. A Church of New York. A rulewas adopted at Charleston that two-thirds of all the votes of ele the eletoral college was required to nomiate rese a candadal fbr President. rese The Chair explained, that at Charleston the TO then President was instmeted not to delareM any one nominated Mpless he received two thirds of the votes tf the electoral college, (202 vote.) U " Mr. Outings said there were two-thirdsof two S l 1 n here and if gentlemse who f h' e b eli to vots Douglaes would be te, ashtated by a two-third vote. He hoped bog - there would be more beallete to ee wohat gem r tlgmen would do, and that Mr. Church would gatE I withdraw his resolution. vot - Cries of 'That's it--that' it- .-y .' nd r " Mr. Hoge of Virgint, aid hbe hped thev I wouldbe no ballots, and if these gentlemen r t who delined to vote did net vot, he sould was - treat them as outof the Oenveatbloa witl I "Mr. Churcbthen withdrew his resoltion he till another ballot was had." a Yet, after thi notloeserved upon these 18 a dele , they again refined to vote: andt is ads e simply ridiculous to say that the President t could rord their votes as cast in favor of the rau ) resolution. Mr. Church boldly declared that the the "resolution ws inteaded.to cAmge thAe rY Mr. $ of insirustion adopted at Charleston," requir- th lag a two-thirds vote to neomnate the candi- t Sdate. '5 Of the 18 delegates who remained in the &vC Convention as spleators, five were from Ken- DI taEy, six from Delaware, and seven fom free M issouri. " + S Th five delegates froth Kentucky led a fr written pmtest, in which they stated that though they remained in the C.eention, thLe " at i rtieipate in its delibatis, r ,eve hold ourselves or our constitue tea kww by Eis etis, but leave both at full liberty to at as a futre circumstances may dictate "" (d by G. A. Cuidwell, W. W. Williams, W.ýo radley, Samuel B. Field, and Thos. J. r Young.)" gat Mr. Saulsbory ef Delaware, anhnonsoed, in behalf of the'six delegates from his State who remaind in the Convention, but refused to vote, that "in future they should dealihe to es, reerving to themselves the right to a.t emsatarasthey deea pMopr." o. 4'be seven delegat e OMI noWi avte no tie that they would remain lh the anl- -i tion, but world take no pat i it dslelibera tions. And these are the votes uo vMc hic this committee base dtheir two-thirstw fr 4 Mr. Douglas! s . so qiETnuir uiuva To esns rNoN t, a OLT. Nr Q asy ZIo MsL B3ot.s44, t or But eves edmitiwig that he .geuidutt dist £3 he give neta that these who l n obes t hi Sshoruld bemonated in a ur; of the eolstion; ly emven admitting the propoittotl that his mere of ed lps'~i ri had the power ta ed the delegi cl iy ~whoidot digesa,'iee etefa he.M m1 o hIr M - as, declarations that they wed met uratw. aW dIwy to how at am wa * n ef' we to delegate to o to *ehi he of the resoultion. T trac of pro he egegings which we trave heretoforeqtt ., i mawa that debet uama this rumoetia wudi warlto· w_ his dissent, was uigeleeel- - nIe. oed fr e,wd -,, - 3. ys ore le T n Jd ore. ' h .. . 1 4 I '-- I-wan .Jonso Pnsslveala ees chmth otndstd det behadne thyid r Guthrie 1e countedl as having ti.en iasl. t hs.I d.. resolutioi, declaring 31r. Jhusgin th, In, i nee. Having steadily, through retplt.d iu lots, voted againet Mr. Duugl~s, the(y 'nro' Ii t1 allowed to object to the re,,iutil wihe. it en oflired, nor even given the ,ll.,orttalityv i voting against it. hern are thei prI.,c.,*.,ls at this stage : "Mr. Clarke then moved to dec!are Sthllhn A. Douglas the Democratic nomin,,e for the Presidency. (Ap plause.) Mr. Hoge, of V irginia, off-red a resolution to that effeet, which was read. The resolution declaring S. A. Donglas the unanimous choice of the (',nvention for the Presidency was adopted by a shout of aryes and cheers. which lasted a considerable time. The band of the Key Stone Club alpearcnl in thle gallery and stru.k up at tile, which was greeted with renllewed chcar,. The President. (Col. Todd, l. declared Ste phen A. Deuglas, of Illinois, the unanimous choice of the Democratcy of the. United States as their candidate for the Presidency. (Lmud cheers." ) The ro, in furor of the res.ol,tioe ws alone tiken.' The netire rot, wtas not put to the (nrenti,,n : But, as if still further to denmonstrate that the eighteen delegates frim Kentucky. Dela ware, and Misseuri. took no part at all In the Sroceedings, we call attention to the vote for Vice President, when,, the refse.,/ aeqoin to rote: PiEVN VOTIE FRoIM (iEORtIIA .ANI ARkANuA ('OUNTIED v% IEIAN'EK O.F TilHE ('N\T RI l.E. OEOiRUlA. But the nine votes counted thr the Is d,.le gates who refused to vote, with the 11.1 vIie. cast for Messrs. Breckinridge and Lan,, added to the 1l81 given for Mr. Doiugla., give. only. a total of 20.3, seven lees than tIhe vtet claiueld by thi.committtcr Where do they get the re mainllg seven votes ? From Georgia and Arkansas. The State of Georgia w:.- entitled to 10 votes in the Conventionm, to Ire cast by 20 delegates. Tile Dem<cracy of Georgia, howev4r, appointed 40 delegate", to cast the)0 votes, and instructed them to vote i "iY the majority to determine the ... aIld in State. Eleven of the Iajorlty who ,ec,,ded the Convention i eleven l:ing alow.d t., r.-,tedit C.onvention decid,'d, by a vt. of f~Sto 100, that those remaining froin that State were not, under the unit rule, entitled to vote. At Baltimore, the seceding delegates from Georgia, re-appoimted by the Statl C vtneu tion, refused to take their seats; but one of them, (Mr. Gaulden,) however, came into the Convention, but did not pretend to vote, as the majority had determined not to take their seats in the Convention. And yet these are the per.-ons decided hy the Convention to be anwf spectators, and not delegates, who had no right to vote, and wiver did vote i* the conveniws, who are now rep resented as delegates Ly the Douglas ComLunit tee, and pressel into the service, for the pur ;poe of manufacturing a two-third vote for Mr. Douglas' ARKANS&A. Under the decision of the Convention, the two delegates, Messrs. Flournoy and Stirman, who remained in the Convention at Charles ton, were alowediet east one vote; the three bogns delegates frdn the First Congressional District, one vote; and the withdrawing dele gates who were re-seeredited to Baltimore, two yutes. The latter declined to take their seats, and Mr. Stirman withdrew. is li thnus reorted: ,Mr. Stirman, of Arkansas, when his State was called, sail, in justice to himself, and with mrrow, he parted with the Convention, he could not longer remain after what had beaen done." Thas a majority of the delegates actually admit"e to the convention had withdraw~ or remdsed to take eir seats, and, andA the unit rule, the 'h hado rfight to o vote. Yet the sommled hi eated both the I vote of Mr. Stirman, who bed. withdrawn, increased thd one vote awarded by the Convention to the begu three, to a vote and a half, and thus seured an addltoat vote Wf6m Arkansas in ,Avor of the bdotution. In this way. the Douglas Committ6 got siz additional votes fr.e Georgia, mtd'one from Aaipb s In ftvor 'tiNe resolutioen thu inreasin atheir agures from 201 to 21 otta '. ACTUAL VOTtA,CR 0I n xa. DO'oLAs. We now prpeps to sher, beyemdeavil, that even the vet (1814) gives by the Iegis . Executive O aatta s is the. fb going table, a shaving been eat fe.ltr. Dsag hle broed Serror. Lets examiem thW matter. SMsaeehasetb is put dowa at 1vote for Mr. pogla whm there were aoly ten dele gatesentitled toist Lve vota emaiu ing in the Conawetion from that fitate. M sachu pests had thirteen notes, repreeated by 2;del Selpta; dlker of these delegates withdrew joined be beokiaridg apm t laun Co t veao, leadrig, we reu , but tan deete. to eamt Ave vates. l Jreso as ~ tereseat'd by 10 dlegaats, with theriLghtleaelase votes. Slhe la. ed .as avin iveg the i n le Ae tovo . -r.. la, inuteed e , a of the (M . Stoughton) haviag swihdraw, a od jined the other Convention. M M sadi repaudedas havinge aatsfrld • ,wote for Mr. Douglas, wham thLree of her dl ata entitled to l votes, refused to vote for SI Iatnd witMrew treaot the Convention: a• "Mr. Beaker, of Minaeota, said he and twu ye of his ol et d .relto ainmaeeu the con ei claion at 5eltthey had arrived; they went SteoCharlestem, W, came to Bahotl i, actated ii ume by a idtevb prstb hamaony, nan f 4pa, apd s o tihe Ieeerntle party: ge hag*~keo'iat foheaL abE thbit country. . their detliadrft had bihe; theyl heat d, bein for ay d4e'aomn ad iad crilhle to objeet, and they now took this hit sap, in viwo other p aotbiTiea Vatin dpon SIbha hefesthe jiai. I conenlasions, han dy ldouteed tdeir detblr stiao to vacate their he, M,'tashdi wtth tbem theeredantmals which Id u-4 ddeited tn.m the Natona" .Democrtle ; kFmsagi I pat .do 'iwnrsav n Zl .u WIskPV sa d r dehr.ea __ _ to