The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1848-06-28

luton We know of nothing else to which he can refer
The history of that transaction this While the esolu-
lions providing for the organization OF the Convention
were pending Mr. Hannegan moved to lay them the
table, enable him to offer resolution adopting rules for
their government There much objection to this prop
Qston; and Mr.. Hannegan, abandoning his motion to
lay the pending resolutions the table for the purpose
indicated, said
Twill propose, them that the resolutions be laid tempo
ray on the table, in order 10 introduce the following
luton, viz;
lna san dsegae and every Pson claiming
convention and all honorable and Just their
This proposition received Nth great appause and
the question being then upon the motion lay upon
the table, II Dds agreed to-
Here, then, pointed concurrence in the prop
osion of Mr. Hannegan 1t received with APP
plause and the pending business which it would seem
ought to have been disposed Of laid on the table for
the purpose of adopting the resolution
Mr. Preston King Of New York Immediately took the
hoor and said:
believe the first question is organization of the
convention We must first ascertain who the members
of this body have declined any of the propo
stons that have been submed and until the question Of
the organization is settled shall continue to refrain from
voting
twas thus that the delegation of which he was
a member (the banburners) would decline to vote on
the resolution upon the ground stated and that the object
of the would be frustrated He was sustained by
others and motion of Mr. Yancey, the resolution of
Mr. Hannegan laid the table await the organiza-
ton of the convention. In the mean time, the Committee
Credentials acted and it will be that far from
their action being inconsistent with the action Of the
Convention, alleged by Mr. Van Buren, as far any
opinion expressed by the Convention, ii coin
cden with the subsequent action of the committee; and
we are Informed it was regarded by the committee.
But suppose the committee was wrong in everything
that they did yet, did not the go before the
ton, where the committee knew, in any event, il would
60 in the last resort, without prejudice to either set OF
contestants, except far it created by their own
conduct? The committee itself urged the Convention to
take up the case, had all the facts before it, and de-
eide it for itself The following is the language of the
gentleman who represented the committee:
In conclusion, permit me to say that the duty imposed
upon the committee was very unpleasant one Our only
wish discharge duties satisfaction
far possible to the parties and the great democratic
party of the Union here assembled And we have no OBJ
lection recommment of the report with instructions,
if shall be the pleasure Of the convention But would
os IL had better decide il at once No decision made by
other body than the convention ITSELF WIN be satlsiac-
tory. In the end will be compelled to decide the case,
and ii had better do 1t at once
The suggestions of the committee acquiesced in,
and the convention gave full hearing both sets of
Contestants and it did not Mr.. Van Buren, alleges,
unopened the credentials and proofs of either set Of
delegates On the contrary, the fully nveshga
ted; and portion of the Convention having great doubt
upon the question Of regularity, majority Of it decided
follow the precedent set in the Pennsylvania in 1885,
when Mr. Van Buren, was himself nominated and the
convention was led by Slas Wright and others of Mr.
Van Burens leading friends That CASE as far as the
in
the late case of New York decided, in every
essential similar to this last case. But Mr. Van Bu-
rem insists that the New York case was not decided
on the question of regularity, but that the barn
burners rejected (as he is pleased to speak OF
their admission) in consequence of their advocacy of
the Wmot Proviso 1t seems to us impossible for any
one who looks to the known opinions of the Convention
upon that question, disclosed in their proceedings,
particularly in their nominations, to believe that the ad
mission of the two sets OF delegates from New York
decided upon any such ground Had been, doubt
less the hunkers (as they called would alone have
been admitted. But the decision turned upon the
question of reguarty and the Convention having doubt
about that followed the precedent set in similar case,
in convention at which Mr. Van Buren, was nominated,
and the leading spirit of which was Silas Wright! So
Mr. Van Buren, is in in every statement made in
the following extract from his letter
Your delegates claimed the exclusive right represent
the democracy this State in the convention and offered
maintain their title thereto before that body by docu
ground Not certainly the ground that they
able for their credentials and proofs
turned them unopened, and the convention itself die
not profess put the rejection of their demand snc
ground and yet that the only ground which,
we'll founded their claim could be properly overruled.
In conclusion of this article beg leave say, that
Mr. Van Buren, has the singular honor of having been
the sole beneficiary of the first national convention in
having received the nomination of Vice President at its
hands for which purpose it was alone caled-Uhere
was, in fact, necessity for a convention to nom
nate General Jackson for a reelection j of being
the nominee of the second, for the Office of President
10 which he was elected Of being the nominee o
the third for President, when he defeated by
the people; on being prominent candidate for nomi
nation before the fourth, when he rejected by his
party; of having, thereafter, arragned the motives
by which his opponents in that convention actu-
aed and the means resorted for the accomplishment
their object in the merit he claims for himself, for hav
ing forborne to scan them at the time, the only
sion when he was unsuccessful before such conven-
ton and of having bolted the nominations of the last
convention, which is the first since the organization
of conventions before which his not brought
| We have already extended this article to greater
tent than we could have wished We will next pay oul
respects the views that Mr. Van Buren, presents of the