Edgefield advertiser. [volume] (Edgefield, S.C.) 1836-current, 1840-02-27

fcss too, that we would like 10 see some
evidence of general amnesty by The old
Union party, in the choice of the opposite
party, to the Legislature, from the districts
where they held The ascendancy. The
notification districts havein many cases
set the example of eIectiag their old oppo-
nenls, but if il has been followed in sin
gle instance blythe Union districts VIC cam
not call it to mind"
Our residence in this Stale, since the
old parry lines were borkcn up, does not
enable US to speak confidently, in matters
relating 10 them. We know very little
indeed in relation to them, and have new
cr cared to enquire. We presume, how
ever, that the "oli Union party" have
manifested no disincIinaion to support
their old opponents, on any proper occa-
sion: Mt any rarc we have never heard of
any thing OF the kind; aud, it we mistake
not, I{ersIlaw Districts is al least IA sing
instance" where, having "thc ascendan-
cy," they have elected ''sonie Of the opPo-
site party To the Legislature" But, even
though there were, as yer, no such partic-
arinstancc, is it no, sufficient, that they
have every where acted with us, cordial
ly, honestly, and zealously. thruus shout the
State, in the several Districts, aud the
Legislature, in support of our common
principles and measures i? AS striking
instance Of this, within our knowledge, we
may mention, that when VIC were invited
here to advocate those common principles
ard measures, il was alike by Union men
and Nulltircs. On suggesting 10 ono Of
the latter, (among the reason which deci-
ded us at first 10 dec!ine.) that we should
perhaps be Objectionable to the Union In
dependent Treasury men, in consequence
CT our fnrmer jealous advocacy Of the
princi pies of Notification, he said 10; that
when they were asked if we should he so,
they declared not in the least, as; fully and
heartily concurrine with them, on The ey
isling great queslionat issue, they should
he equally as well satisfied with us, as if
VIC had been a Union man; And when our
Prospectus WIS issued. their acts fully JUS
tilted their ,COrdS: our largest and earliest
subscription lists were received from Tie
old Union Districts, respectively, than To
the others.
Itailords US pleasure, thus openly and
publicly, to testify to their lberalily, i'm
parialiry, and good faith, and, under all
The circumstances, it is certainly due to
them from us. We frankly submit it 10
our highly respected contemporary Of the
Messenger, if ibis be not u strong ana
over ruling scloll'to his objection; mani
feslcd, as it has been, not in ga single in
stance" only. but by the Union Districts
generally. We presume those Districts
have not in any plain and uncquivocal
manner, retused TO support them "of the
opposite party" who'll is probable have
never offered themselves to them as candi-
dates; aud if they have not particularly
called them out, this may very fairly be
cacy of feeling, which would naturally
prompt minority, to hesitate in offering
unsolicited political favors TO the men of
the majority, as TO any Gisincinalion 10
support them. Itis plain, that these acts
of concession and Cancellation, should he
from the strong, 10 the weak-Ihe majnri-
ly, 10 the minority-not from the weak to
the strong. Ifsuch has been the case, SO
far, it is as it should; and we rejoice that
our friends have sci most noble and
maonanimous example of it, in the nomi-
nation of Col. Richardson, which cannot
be mis,akcn-which is an honor 10 hu-
mani,y, and puts 10 shame, the miserabIy
narrow and contracted conduct so common
and general, in the parlizan conflicts Of The
day.
Since writing the above, we have seen
a most singular communication, in the
Charleston Courier, of Tuesday last, sign
ed "1he Lower Country" questioning the
propricty of the nomination, and The mule,
&c., and putting forth Judge David john
sou, in opposition to it. We are utterly
unable 10 perceive any thing in it ''out Of
The usual course:" but, not having time
or room at present to show that it is not so,
will barely remark. that if the writer IL
srecs with Col. Richardson, in politics. il
is rather astonishing that he should nomi-
nate Judge Johnson; and if he agrees with
Jud ge Johnson il is not al all surprising
that he opposes the nomination of Col.
Richardson. In the latter case. how can
he assume to speak for party he so thor
oueIy differs from2-or, in the former, how
reconcile it 10 his principles, to nominate
man so decidedly opposed 10 them +? We
should like to see him ''defne his POSITION"
in this matter!
We entertain high respect for Judge
johnson, personally, but as we declared
when he was advocated by The Telescope,
last summer, it is altogether nut Of The
question, for us, or our political friends,
either of the old Notification or Uuion
party, to support thorough Clay and
United States Bank man, for the highest
Office in the State.
If the writer in The Courier agrees with
Judge Johnson, let him come out openly
and say so, and thereby give good reason
for supporting him, against Col. Richard
son; hut, in such case, what right has he
| TO declare himself "not we'll satisGedn &c.