Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1835-06-29
EH.sUFSKsyEsG E'FFc&K.y'Ea.1.
MONDAY. June az, 1895.
COL. JOHNSoN'S LETTER.

N.n
Vention and the nominee of that body fer the Vice
Presidency.
he hrSt thing which will strike lhc attention Of
lie reader, is, that Andrew Stevenson, ESQ. has
signed his name 10, and is in all probability the
writer oil, letter, in which it is said, He TAXI
pleasure IN performing this dutyn--that is, in IN
forming Col. Johnson of his nomination. |, this
'rne Why, then, did Mr.. Stevenson manifest in
the meetings OF the Virginia delegation at Bal,i-
more, so much hostility 10 the nomination of the
Colonel Did hcno, indeed, draft the resolutions,
adopted by the Virginia DELEGATION. protesting
against that nomination, and declaring that they
would not recommend Col j. 10 the support oi
their constituents! How, then, does ii happen,
that 1t gave him so much " pleasure" 10 inform
the Colonel that he was the choice of the Convcn-
honf Mr. SteVenson's position, in relation to tn
affair, was before well calculated to excite tisrusi
of his candor and integrity | WAS a subject OF
| aStonisllmcnt, even among some of his political
friends, that having taken decided stand against
Col. Johnson's nominations in the meetings of the
Virginia delegation, he should afterwards consent
to act as chairman of the committee appointed 10
prepare an address to the people of the United
States, in defence of the principles of the nom-
nccs, and advocating their prctcnsons to the offices
to winch they were respectively nominated. That
astonishmcnf is necessarily increased by the atti-
tudc in which ills published correspondence places
Understanding sclt-convictcd, as lie does, of play
ing the hypocrite, either toward, his associates at
Baltimore, towards Col. Johnson in his letter.
But leaving this collateral branch Of the subject
for the present. let briefly pay Our respects to
Col. Johnson himself.
The Colonel sets out in the usual formula Of
such papers, by modest disclaimer of all >upc-
rior pretcnsons 10 the office for which he has been
northumberland very significant hint follows to
Mr.. Riyes, that, nasmuch as he would lave given
Mr.. r. his cordial support had the Baltimore Com
vcntion nominated that gentleman, he of course cx-
poets, in turn, the cordial support of Mr. II. now
that the position of the parties is reserved. This is
certainly very strong argument, and we do not
see how MIR. RivcS resist its force, especially
since, by permitting his friends to bring his name
before the Convention, he virtually achnoNlcdged
the right of that body to dictate to him the position
he should occupy in the coming contest. What
effect it will have upon Mr.. Riees, we are unable
to surmlsc. We presume, however, that he will BIZ
guided in his course by the ultimate decision of his
political friends in the next Virginia LeeisattIre
who will sit as an appellate tribunal upon the do
ings of the Baltimore Conventional new wheel
by the way, in the caucus machinery, and one
which, II its rlghtto interfere he generally admitted
must eventually throw the whole fabric iuto d>or-
der. / huS far, ii rests upon the strange as>rlmp-
ton of the dissen,cnts 10 Col. Ioln,on's nomina-
ton, tn, while the decision of the Baltimore
Convention so far as the Presidenoy is concerned.
is binding upon the party" they have a RIGHT IL
appeal from the lice Prcsialafil nomination!
But do not both nomination., resi- upon lhc same
princi c-and are not both sustainabl" by the same
arguments Why shall the Jackson ils1 Of Ten
ncssee and Alabama who, ptctcuiaa Judge
White, determine TO disregard the nomination of
Mr. Van Buren, for the Presidency by the Balti-
more Convention, be read out of church for non
conformity while the Jackson men Of VIRGINIA,
vino oppose the other nomination Of Tat body.
are retained in full communion! Eiihe' tue nomi-
nations of that Convention are binding, or the,
not. If the former, then they are as obIjo3-
tory in Col. Jo,nson's case as in Mr. Van Buren,
ii the latter, then the whole scheme was \ more
ridiculous farce than even We had supposed it to
be.
But, the important enquiry is, What otc CoL
JohaS0n'S prmcipirS? And wonderful to tell. not,
outstanding he has been in Congress some TWEEN
ty-odd ears, it turns out from his exposition. that
they materially different from those. which
judging from his votes and speeches, durino thai
period, had been universally ascrbcd to hml This
has very much the appearance of " looking one
way and rowing anOtler'-and, without slhiectinu
ourselves to the impuation of unchartablcncs>. we
must naturally attribute this seeming accommoda
ton of his opinions to circumstances either TO i'm
bccy of mind or dcslitution Of prnciple--cither
of which should be regarded as a disqualification
for the office to whiclhe aspires.
We admit that in 1911, Colonel Johnson voted
against National Bank-that he also opposed il
in lSl6-and that, il. 1884, he voted for a rcsolrl-
ton declaring that the present Bank ought not TO
be rccharcred. But did he not likewise in 1881
admit, that while the present Bank ought to 90
down, another, based upon somewhat different
princpes,--the Presidents Etcheqacr Eonk, for
eXampc,-was necessary? thereby surcndaring
the constitutional question, and recognizing the