Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1845-01-03
MONTPELIER, VI. FRIDAY, JANUARY 3, 1916

after, one of the newspapers of that party (the
Rutland Herad) came out with the nomination of
Judge Williams as their candidate for Governor
This aroused the ire of the friends Of Col. Paine
and the Vermont Waterman, the leading organ of
the Wing party, came out with long editorial,
in vndicaton of the proceedings of the convention,
and strongly censurng the course of the Rutland
Herald, urging various objections to Judge
Williams" which he said were &C insuperabIe in
the judgment of sterling ,Uhigs!" The first of
said objections was in the following words; to
wit .. ..-. .... ... .....
" He had been nominated by another and hostile
party which makes no distinction between whg
and loco foco principles"
Now, if this be a valid " objection" (and
doubt not but it is with some I" sterling whgs'')
the same would have holden good had the Libor
ty party nominated any other person as their can
didate for Governor. Even had they nominated
Col. Paine, according to this wing logic, the wings
could not have taken him up, because, forsooth,
he had been nominated by another party!
wei, by means of earnest entreaties, persua-
sous aud threats, Judge Williams was induced to
withdraw his name from the canvass
The Liberty party. finding themselves thus
showed out at the " tail end of the wing cart" and
forever prescribed by them, concluded to set up
in full for themselves. and thus to &c fight on their
own hook" end in behalf of freedom, which they
consider as the first great principle which Il free
people should contend for. They Immediately
held a convention, and nominated full set of
candidates for their officers, and have not failed,
every year since, to make their nominations
The first article in the Liberty party creed is, a
determination to "support no Shareholder for Of
fee and to oppose the election to office of all
who support slavery or its abettors." This creed
was made known at the first organization of the
party, four years ago. and has ever since been
published to the world 1t cannot therefore be
said that we have deceived other parties with re-
gard to our principles; they knew on what grounds
we stood, and it was their privilege to "goUern
themselves accordingy."
This privilege both the wing and democratic
parties have awaited themselves of, as they eacl
had an undoubted right to do. Each nominated 6
STAKEHOLDER for presdent--the former by acclana
tion-the latter, after long protracted strife ant
contention. Each party undoubtedly consulted
whether, without the aid of the Liberty party, anC
: EVEN IN DEFIANCE OF 1T, they should be able tC
elect their candidate. Each professnd to be con
fdent Of success. One only could be successful
and. now the defeated (whig) party, chagrned a
their defeat, and filed with rage at the result o
their own doings, with impotence unparalleled
face about and cXcaim, ''tho Liberty Party ha
done il"
! The Liberty party do not deny, but rejoice tt
be 'ieue that they have the numerical power sufli
cient to have given different result to the election
but they would have been recreant to the first prin
p oir'oe Of 'l.eir orgnnizatinn -recrean 10 Justice
humanity and freedom, to have partaken Of tn
uncIean thing (sUyory,) presented to them b
each other party; and we would in all soberness
here inquire, whether the wing party, who wen
into the contest with their eyes open, havin
. thrust us from them, and said, "Whom you sup
port, we will not support"- that we wer
pledged not to support a slapc-hOIder;-stiIl,a as i
defiance of us, presented slave holder to the pub
lie as their candidate. Under these circumstances
repeat, does it become the wings to turn roun
: and say "hae LibertyParty has done UP'
In conclusion, my opinion is, that the Liber
party might, in all honesty and sincerity say, wit
! regard to the slavery candidates for president, a
did the lady who saw her husband engaged il
mortal combat with bear. Gentlemen" sal
she to the by-standers, d" beg you not to inerfer
in the least-giVe them clear field and fair play
it is matter of perfect Indifference to me whic
i of them comes off conqueror." H.
v Chelsea, Nov. 81, 1914.