The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1844-12-09

in the Post, srsggers our original belief in lis
authorship;
"The false Doctrine that the election OF candi.
date is public sanction of all his political opinions,
was fret preached not many years ago, and has al
ready done its full share of mischief II Is doctrine
as Injurious IL Is false Nor Is II less fatal error
to hold that successful election sanctions all the re
solutions Of the convention which nominated The
candidates. There might be some show OF reason IN
it, if the delegates together as the representa-
tises Of particular opinions, To make them known
but when they assemble merely as agents TO h1 upon
candidate and set themselves up as teachers, moth
log il more dangerous as nothing can be more al
ropant III such a notion were to become prevalent,
and our nominating conventions were TO continue
the practice Of debating to future legislatures, by
means OF resolutions, passed through the misguided
zeal Of some the sinister purposes of others, and he
unsuspecting confidence of more, may as well
abolish our legislative assemblies. They will be no
longer the real makers of laws.
We must say that we cannot believe the
it was who introduced the resolutions alluded
10. And we must say that we do not differ
much with the writer in condemning the prac-
tice fallen into by conventions, of debating 10
the party creed, in the form OF resolutions
The members OF a convention may very prop
or in any other manner they please; but they
should avoid even the semblance of debating 10
the People. They should merely reflect the
opinions of their constituents. which, the writer
in the Post must permit us 10 say, we believe
was done in relation to Annexation. Their
purposes were changed, in consequence of the
unequyocal manifestation Of the will Of their
constituents. Had they met and proceeded as
the writer in the Post doubtless wished them 10
do the two-thrds rule would not have been
adopled-an Annexation candidate would not
have been nominated-and failing TO be gov
erned by the wishes of their constituents the
party would have been overlhrown. We ask
The writer under consideration, if he believes
the party would have succeeded, if the two
thirds rule had not been adopted2
The writer next denies that majority of the
People were in favor of Annexation:
"Has Mr. Polk majority of the votes cas,' It
is perhaps too early to get precisely accurate state
men,s of the number on either side but it should
seem that the abolition voe amounts to nearly Co.
600 and that Folks majority Clay Is less than
that by some 10 900; in other words that Polk has
only minority OF the votes cast II that should
provo be the case, when the official canvass is
made public the most sturdy champion of Texas
must admit that the people have no, yet declared
themselves favorable TO the scheme. But the con-
trary, if his theory of the election be correct they
have condemned It. What then, it may be asked
has the election decided Ii has decided that the
administration shall be in Democratic hards and IL has
decided nothing else This is much, undoubtedly, be-
cause in the present state Of parties the President
may prevent the accomplishment of schemes which
we look upon as dangerous but, an expression of
the will OF the whole people, or a guide 10 those
who always watching the currents ofpubic opin-
ion, IL amounts TO nothing"
When the precise majority in South Carolina
shall be ascertained, we incline TO the opinion
il will appear that Mr.. Polk has received ma
jorily Of all the votes cast But if this should
not appear, we ask what authority has the Post
writer for saying majority OF the abolition vo-
tiers, who supported Birney, are not in favor of
Annexation In our opinion, the abolitionists
will soon be unanimous in favor of the mea-
sure. Ii is the only means under the sun by
which slavery may be abolished in many of the
States, in any reasonable Iime-unless they
should be massacred. AT all events, the aboli-
iionists knew very well that the success of Mr..
Polk insured Annexation they knew they had
ii in their power 10 prevent his election, by vor-
ing for his opponent; and yet they did not vote
against him in any Of the doubtful States but
Ohio. This is strong proof that if they are not
IN favor Of the measure, neither were they op-
posed 10 IL; and this leaves the test upon the
votes cast for Messrs. Polk and Clay.
But the writer in the Post is still opposed TO
the measure, even if there is a majority of
$4,000 or so in favor of it,
The question IS not question of hnance--h is
not a measure Of to.day-it does not concern the
opening Of canal or the clearing Of a river-or the
disposition Of the public domsin-or new armamepts
IL na question which bears in itself the elements of
all the discord, and all the bitterness. of our whole
history. Questions OF war or peace, Of national bo
nor or disgrace, OF new expenditures when Ameri-
can credit Is already public soon, and more than
ALL Of slavery, question the exciting that bas
ever yet stirred up the spirit Of man. all these are
or are supposed, matters not which, TO be involved
IN the single question Of anpcxng Texas Now with
one million and half for it, and only fifty thou
sand less against II, what prudent statesman
would venture upon ~ Who that hiss lust sense
OF the responsibility Of his place, what lover of his
country would risk its peace upon so nice balance
MT onen
But we are not content with majority of
5O,0O0-though, upon the Democratic principN
that majority should rule, it ought to be
enough, in all conscience /; and since il is easily
demonstrable that the Democratic PARTY is nearly
unanimous In lis favor ADD that the party has fair
y carried The day on the merits of Annexation
we must appnse the writer under notice that his
posiuate IN reference to snti-Annexation Dem
ocrats voting for Mr.. Polk, will also apply to
Annexation Wings voting for Mr.. Clay. And
we venture 10 say hundreds ofthousands of the
Wings are in favor of immediate Annexation
Mr.. Clay was not nominated because he wa,
opposed TO Annexation. His party would have
supported him If he had differed with il on anu
measure. Ii was mite different with Tho d..