The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1848-06-07

Friday
Tn. Addres. Of the BNgr,burner Delegation
We have read with the letter which Messrs
ambreIeng and Wilson, delegates from the State large
and the 81 delegates OF the congressional districts, have
addressed o the democratic republican electors of the
State of Ney York; We have no intention OF entering
ullv into its merits 1T is due, however, to the Balh-
more convention to say ON, word in behalf of the course
which they intimately adol ted The convention had
three Maths before # one wa TO admit the one sci of
delegates at the expense of the other-hat u.s. to admit
the barnburners and exclude the hun kers or u'ce usrs
another to exclude both and the las was to admit
both. The question had been anxion> Wy considered
by the democratic party before the NEE. ing Oh the
convention. We confess that have TO, several
weeks come to the conclusion that the last was the
only proper In word, it not best for he
delegates of the other States say both of dele
gates from New York. ''We would be most happy to ad-
nit New York int the convention. We have no right
to exclude her; but, it is family QUARREL you must
settle among yourselves. We have neither the time nor
the inclination to gojpo the claims Of both. One set de-
duce their claims their from source and the
other from another The convention has no time
to examine the whole series of arguments by which each
supports its pretensons. We should be obliged to IN
quire into the party machinery of the democracy of New
Yorkto trace all its usages through various conventions
legislative caucuses and successive resoutons-to see
too more or less into the OF these usages, SO
far as they were affected by The principles of popular
representation Our attention, too, would have been
called to the comparative strength of the two clques-
which the most numerous, which claimed to be the
true church. and which the dissenients. This in
qury would have involved complicated points OF
statistics Was better then, to leave the question
to the delegations themselves, with the hope that they
might agree among themselves! Was not this course
too recommended by some former example which was
made long before the hunkers and barnburners
known and, of course, where the decision made
without the slightest reference to their dssensons ~
We have no doubt that these and similar views
operated, to great extent upon the Baltimore Conven-
onand much than any of the reasons to which the
addressers have attributed the OF the convention
The New York politics have, to large extent, been in
volved in mystery. Few of the citizens of the other
States pretend to understand them; and have some.
times presumed to doubt whether the republicans of New
York themselves acquainted with the whole ground
of discussion Certain it is that the Baltimore Conven-
ton would have been considerably puzzled, and that
much more time would have been necessary to make the
investigation than they could have spared for the pur
pose The Seneca IN. W Observer makes the follow
ing defence for the of the Baltimore Convention
which confirms some of the preceding remarks:
"The most embarrassing question before the conven-
ton will readily be supposed, to determine the
regularity of the New York delegation. 1t proved either
be altogether knoty question to determine the
convention refused make itself party to the divisions
among the democrats of this State, and admitted boh
thorizng them throw the thirtysix votes which the
State was entitled, equivalent thereto. The
quence was that the Utica delegation Withdrew from the
convention, and the Albany delegation refused
that of New York not in effect represented
in the convention.
"The convention is blamed for ncgecng decide the
question: which tho regular delegation. But strong
be given for their refusal do The first
the impossiby of understanding the matters
ISSUE We have endeavored ourselves get the right
of the matter and able which offer the
best show ofreguarity There thousands OF democrats
in this State who profess have ntelIge who
are equally fault If such is the here, how diff
cult it be for individuals in other States TO un-
derstand the Of difficulties. We know,
that with considerable information to the posi-
tion of parties in other States, we could not deter
mine like question in Pennsy lvana, had it occur
red there and readily conceive how difficult it is
for citizens in other States understand differences
Perhaps another reason equally strong was that majority
ofhe convention felt assured that if they decided the
natter there hope that would improve the cond
ton of the democrats in this State and that whether they
lid did not, the OF this State lost, in any
event There bare possibility that nomination
might be made which would have been supported by New
York. but the contingency hopeless to influence the
members OF the convention and they adopted the course
which deemed to be the least offensive.
"We have the slightest doubt that any individual
would have been nominated which the delegations from
this State would have agreed support No effort
probably made ascertain whether they would upon
any man. because it was deemed altogether improbable
that they would The convention, therefore, abandoned all
attempts conciate New York. hopeless and looked
for such would command the greatest strength
the of the Union. Independent of this State, the nom
nation is the strongest that could have been made.
"The nomination will be sustained, have no doubi
by that portion of the party which represented IN inc
Albany convention. To what extent will be sustained
by the friends of the Utica delegation remains to be seen
We think it will receive support from that quarter
Neither party having taken any part in the nomination.
neither would be bound sustain but it will un1ues
tonably be sustained by section OF the party nhan
mousy, and by the other in part As we have no iau'~
find with the action of the convention having recommend
ed the adoptedwe shall support the mountainous
although. things in this State, it is labor lost ana our
zeal will therefore hardly burn brightly did in ioA
}, The late convention, indeed have only pursued inc
precedent which set by the Baltimore Conven
ton Of 1885. Two sets of delegates appeared before
them from the great State of Pennsyvania-the WON
delegates and the Muhlenberg delegates Both claimeo
to be the representatives of the genuine democracy anu
considered the other apostates." The convention
finally admitted both The argument on this question"
put forth length in the debates of the convenuo
in Nless Register of 1885. We have for all INC
DIT