Alexandria gazette & advertiser. [volume] (Alexandria [D.C.]) 1822-1824, 1824-11-13
counts for. we know DOT with who cor.

!, counts for, we know not with wbs' cor
rectDess, the discontinue of i his party
"a The gubernatorial election of tie
| State. Nat. Int.
STATE ELECT,oN.--In our lsst we
waited for the Lion Of the Vest He
rs come, and we want to see no more Of
him-bet shows his teeth instead of his
tail-briefy. every thing is gone in fa-
vor Of Clinton. Such a sweeping de.
feat-such an overwhelming rout, we
have not heard of since the battle Of
Water 90. We kept up our fainting
spirits until we heard from suffolk; 80
in favor of Clinton-et t4 brute; old
Suffolk, which used to give 400 agains.
him. We give up the ship, having
fought Der az well as We could, and to
the very last. Mr.. Clintop's ma ority
will fall little short of 10000.
1t will be asked, what has produced
this change Of opinion? We are pre-.
pared 10 answer the question.
The electoral law has produced this
change; the want of fidelity among Re
publicans; the diversi.yof sentiment on
the subject of the Presidency, and all
tho conflicting opinions and sentiments
which grew out of these contests for
office. One eide wanted to retain the
power in the hands of the legislature. to
answer their views; the other wanted it
to be transferred to the people, to an
s@er their views; IL was party on each
eide, and each side had reason to believe
that they were right, The peoples
men had the most popular name, but
notthe III oct righteous views. all these
dissentiops have resulted In the cleo
ton of Mr.. Clinton; and the injudicious,
it mot unjust, removal from the canal
board, had no small influence in pro.
ducing this result.
From the beginning TO the end of the
contest, the battle has been fought in
manner totally djffsren, from our views
and recommendations, and we owe it to
ourselves to say go. On the subject of
OF the canal, 20 one opposed it original
ly more constantly than we did. and we
opposed it from he most powerful con-
victions thai the resources of the state
we're inadequate to complete project
SO very extensive in itself. We were
in error: and we took the earliest op
portunity TO say SO, and afford perma-
pent and useful support to the project.
When this support became unanimous,
what justification could we offer for
the removal of MIR. Citation? We wish
ed governor Yates re.nomiDs'ed. 1t
was due to him on the ground fprlu-
ciple. lie stood firm TO the party. but
was unpopular. Young would run a.
gainst him and defeat him. Be it SO;
still the nomination was due to Govern
or ya'es, and had he been nominated.
Mr.. Clinton would never had been
In THE position we now stand, and
We must confess, that our regrets at the
result have been in some degree lessen
ed 10 consequence of the ill-timed and
preference declared for MIR.
Clay by Col. Young, at time when it
was not required of him, and when it
was made in defiance of those systems
of regular nomination, upon which he
depended mainly for success. Our
friends have dooe their duty, and we
are ready to go with them at all times.
in the road Of principle. The denocra.
tic party throughout the state will be
purified and posoerfut--it can never