Juliet signal. [volume] (Juliet [i.e. Joliet], Ill.) 1844-1???, 1848-09-26
From the Chicago Democ ar
JOAn N. Bots ont for CIay-HiS Letter to
,lazgs.n Tie CLAY Mesfine. - -~-.,r

The New York Tribune of Monday
iast, contains the letter of Hon. John III
Bolts, OF .Virginia. to the Clay Cominnittee
Of New York. Mr.. Bolts talks ;plainlv
and his words always have been needed
by the wing party. He tells some whole
some truths in relation to proceedings
otthe ''Slanghter,house' convention at
Philadelphia which should lie read by
intelligent electors Of the country.
i Were the election Of General Cass
even doubtful, this letter alone wotfd Set.
tie it. The whigs were hoping that, by
8 creating divisions in our ranks. thew
would divert enough democrats to Van
buten to elect General Taylor. But the
poisoned chalice has returned to their
own lips. The wings are the divided
party & LewisC Cars is the next President.
The following is the letter snfire. We
publish it for the information Of our 'wthig
readers, as they will not probably see il
in the organs oftheir own party.
70 sd RrChMoND, Sept. 6, 1913.
My DEAR SIR:--I received your letter
yesterday, by which I was delighted to
hear ofthe fred p;irp6se-not an Albany
fiash.in.the. pan-of the determined friends
ofthe whfg cause and Henry Clay; for,
as matters now stand, admitting Gsieral
Taylor to be Wing candidate, (Which
utterly deny.) the party as doomed to
certain, ihevitable and aisgracefM defeat
and every man not aciLfuliy blind must
see at. 1t was an fHexGGsable blunder
that from million to million and a
half OF free, Independent whig voters
could be wheedled into fhe line at the
word OF command from some so 70 60
| washington politicians most of whom
had scarcely shed their pinfeathers in
polltlcs} for a candidate who had never
filled civil station, and who had not
for forty Years, and perhaps in his life,
given vote for a. man or measure; with.
! cut experience or acknowledge of the prac.
tlcal operations of any one of those do.
nestle questions about which we had
! differed; of no acquaintance with our for
elgn relations; who said to the people,
~ on must take me on your own respon.
sibility"-'T will not be the candidate of
party. nor twill be the exponent of
your party principles" nor "look to the
doctrines ofyour party as the rule of my
actlons; and while he protested to
shrink from no responsibility, steadily re.
fused to give his opinion on any one
question, except the practical use of the
Veto power; and declared his determine.
ton not to be governed by the action of
the convention, but would be a candidate
no matter Who might be nominated; and
in my judgement his name never should
have been considered in that convention
after he made that declaration. .r-
But this last objection, it was said, had
been removed by the pledges made for
him by Judge Sunders IL Behalf of the
Louisiana Delegation, which he subse. /
quently adopted by card written by his !
authority and published by BGilie peyton,
Bullet, GSc.-and his declaration was
held up by the Taylor men and Wing |
presses of the country as sufficient to rec
oncife all wings to his election. That
Feyton Card and his cordial acc eptance
of the nomination had placed him upon
the Wing platform;- and just at the mo.
ment that many of us had brought our
minds to the conclusion to vote for him,
however Reluctantly, he writes another
letter. in which he says he would have
accepted the nomination from the Bali. |
more CONVENTION on the same terms on
which he accepted the Philadelphia nom 1
inatiop! What becomes, then, of The |
Sunders pledge? What becomes of the |
Peyton Card! And if it be true that there
were NO terms expressed or implied in 1
the Bhilads1phia nomination. that would
be inconsistent, with an acceptance of
the Democratic nomination at Baltimore,
in what an attitude does it place the
Wing party, selecting as their candidate |
one who copld with equal propriety have |
become TIE candidate uf their opponents?
And if not true. in what position does
it place Gen. Taylor? rsas
But what desire TO learn is thisly II
Gen. Taylor is not bound by the action Of
the Philadelphia Convention, who is?
If he may disregard its recommendations.
Who may noll and if he is bound by
their action what right has he to lend the
influence of his name 10 the defeat of Mr..
| Fillmore who was associated, with him
by the SAME body of men, by accepting
a nomination with General w. o. Butler,
a Loco-foco, whose election he thereby
assists in promoting in short his whole
course Of conduct is insulting to the wing
party, and especially to all those who
participated in the proceeding at Phila-
delphia, and if they had any wing spirit
left in them, they would Eesentit.
fit is ascertained that the, purpose of
that Convention was prevented from its
original legitimate objects Of ascertaining
and giving expression to public, sen!i.
ments; by somthering it on the one hand,
and manufacturing, il on the other, or in
other words, if it has been ascertained,
(of which there is no doubt)that the nom.
ioation was mads through the irtstrumen.