The Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1837-1867, 1847-08-07
The Artful Dodger.
LOCOFOCO NOMINATION FOR GOV
ERNOR OF VERMONT.

LEADERS ofthe Locoloco party, by long odds,
that there is in Vcrmout-and those prlnci'
pies may be expressed in one word-non-
co,na,HiGiism. Dir Dillingham;, we sincerely
believe, is Il better practical specimen Ut pos
,sihle) ii n non-conlnitlal politician than Mr..
Van Buren,. lie has not II 1.-THE Of Van Blu
ren's ability, cunning, or slmewdness, but we
rather think he is immensely superior To that
uClruit and plausible gentleman in multiplying
The chances for escape Gom The Effects Qta DOUBT
fiji rote,
We venture to affirm land five are wrong
we shall take pleasure in saying SOY that Mr.
Paul Dillingham;, Junior, by the excessive
acutcness Of his management while repres-
cnting his District in Congress, is able TO pre-
tant himselfin THREE different and distinct
aspects in reference TO every GREAT measure
that was passed upon during his Congress
ional life First for eXample): In Jdror OF
the measure--Second: opposed TO it--and
Third neutral in relation to it. SO rare
felicity of circumstances, enabling candi-
date for office to compete with Janus and
"give him one" it is not often the lot Ola pol
itcian to secure to himself There arc but
few politicians, (cyen among those the laNlty
of whose political morality would permit
them to do t,) who in reference 10 Il ques-
tionublc bill, canSsay to Mr.. A.: "My dear
sir, agree with you as TO the importance OF
that measure, ai,d ! v0icd for )" and 10 Mr.
b.: only dear SIR, think, as you do, that that
measure should have been defeated, and
voted to lag il on the table," and to Mr. c.:
AMY dear sir, it is MY opinion, us il Is yours,
shat it was best not to have anything to do
with that measure, and so didn't rotc at aH."
Stranger and rarcr still is it that Yankee,
New Englander, representative Ola portion
of that particular race of men whose ances-
tors consented to endure all manner of sut-
fering and de privation for Consistcncy's sake,
and who are, themselves, rather remarkable
for the straight forwardness and pertinocity
with which they declare and maintain their
opinions, should he found TO have distin-
guished himself by u versatility Of conduc; on
n given subject that would do credit TO the
provcrbiol instability of a Frcnchinan But
so it is. Mr. Paul Dillingham;, Jr. like the
tabled Cerberus, guards the approaches to
the Citadel of Locofocoism with a triple sn-
gacity, and triple direction of vision. Let
us illustrate by cxampc:-In regard TO the
WrLMor PRovrso, the principle of which
provides etlectualIy against the farther e!e'-
sion ofSidue territory in this Union Mr. Dl-
bingham occupies the ri'tne attitude of hay
ing voted for it, against it, and ofhavng dodg-
ed it ! Let us see.
On the 18th Of FEBRUARY, lS47, the famous
"THREE MILLION BILL" making additional
appropriations for bringing the war with Mex
ico to SPEEDY (9 and amicablc termina-
tion," was passed in the House, and sent TO
the Senate for concurrence. This bill en-
braced the "NNilmot Proviso," and Mr. Dill
linghum voted for it, as did Messrs. Collamer,
Foote, and Marsh
On the LIST of March following, the Senate,
without having acted on the House Bill,
passed "rhree Million Bill" of their own,
differing in no particular from that previous
ly passed by the House ercapting that it did
NOT embrace the Wilmot Proviso. On the
Sd of March this Bill was taken up in the
House for concurrence. MIR Wimot moved
his Proviso, to make the Bill correspond with
the one already passed, and then in the Sen
atc for their concurrence. The Provso was
rejected by vote of 81 to 102-Mr Collamer,
Mr. Footc, Mr. Marsh, and Mr. Dillingham; a
gain voting for it, otcourse.
But now comes the test vote. Immediate
" after the rejection OF his Proviso, Mr. Will
mot moved TO LAY THE Bill UPON THE Ia
BILE, to a,cait The action Of the Senate on The
House bW Our readers will perceive at once
the proprety, nay, the necessity, OF this mo-
ton, for those who upheld the doctrine OF
fhe Wimot Proyiso ms a matter of inleXible
principle & in sincerity, S'not lodging, skulk-
ing cXpedicncy, office-hunting politicians.
The senate could, at any moment concur
with the House in passing the Bill before
:hem, or they could reject the Proviso and
send the Bill back. The House had done
their duty in the promises. The majority
had said to the Shareholders of the South, on
whose behalf and for whose benefit and at
whose insligation tho country had been
wickedly precipitated into an aggressive war:
'fGentemen, we will give you the S3.0O0,O0O
asked for by The President to the expedite the
work of making peace, but we wish you 10
understand that no more Slave Territory is
TO be engrafted upon this already slave rid
den Union" All who thus reasoned and re-
solved in favor of Freedom and Humanity
voted ofcourse in favor ofthe motion to lay
the Bill upon the table. The motion, howev-
er was iost-yeas 81, nays l14-party drill
and party propensities being stronger than
principle and regard for consistency com
bined. But where was Mr. Paul Diling-
hams vote on this question? Was he found
true to the Wilmot Proviso and TO the anti
slavery sentiment of his State? Beloved rea-
der, don't imagine any such thing Here
was his opportunity TO hit the Wilmot Pro-
viso friendly stab and "to lay an ancher to
winward" with that large section Of his par
~ who are bitterly opposed to it. Mr. Dilling-
ham is not tho man to neglect his "opportu-
mites" Here was his chance to display that
small cunning on which great many very
bright and calculating political tacticians
pride themselves, but which not unfrequent-
ly "returns to plague the inventor" On look
ing at the yeas and nays, we find the names
of Judge CoLLAMER, Mr. Foor and Mr.
MARSH recorded in perseverng and consis-
4ent support of the PRINCIPLE of Freedom,
and IN Favor of the motion to lay the bill
on the table, and Mr. Paul Dillingham; .rS
name against the motion, and consequently
AGAINST TIE WILMoT PRovIso!
Now, then, we ask: Why did Mr. Dilling-
ham vote against laying this bill upon the tu-
BILE? As a consistent upright and intelligent
legislator he voted with a meaning. He re-