Arkansas democratic banner., 1851-06-03
The vam Burea IateilRgemccs and Col.

the conaaMation from which t was rcsmscitated. It presents good appeafance, tho woskmaDship IS well ordered, the typography is neat and new, its selections are in good taste, and there is but one thing wanting to render il what it should be, and that is-the want of principle. This lsmeniable deficiency is fully exposed in it's leading editorial in relerene 10 the nominee of the recent Demo- cratic Convention. The editor was one Of the projectors of this Convention and every effort was eSerted by himself and his friends tomake il full and satisfactory representation from the democracy. Gen. Clarke openly declared himself candidate for the nomination; his friends were active in his behalf, and the Gazette and Democrat presented almost every week letters announcing his immense popularity CD in counties tha! eontumaciously re- fused to verify its predictions. So strong was the I Woodruff influence at one tune exerted for him, while others were quiescent. that his nomination Hpon the first ballot was pronounced certain. This idea became prevalent, aud il enough to arouse the democracy. He was not acceptable and the people began to cast round for some candidate more palatabe to theiparty. Hence the resort to Col. Johnson, whom it was well known, enjoyed the confidence and affection of the democracy, and such was the faith of men in hts devotedness to the principles he espoused, that notwithstanding his positive declaration that he had it desire again to enter the political arena, he was again nominated. He accepted the nomination, and made his appoint mepts 10 meet his old constituents, so far as the brief period before the election would allow. Gen. Clarke went home defeated, and we suppose. like most other politicians under similar circumstances, mortified and embittered This was natural, but
 hat he should refuse weeks afterwards, in bis first public notice of the Convention, to support the
 .ominee after fairly submitting his claims in oppo-
 ition to those of Col Johnson argues great want
 that tact and cunning, for which he IS widely
 redited.
 The people will reasonably ask what are his
 iotves for this disorganizng course and what fea-
 n docs. he assign for.yiolating his pledge to sus-
 the nominee of the convention Does he say
 at the convention was not ful and fair in its
 ,hole character No. Does he say that Col Johnson IS not good derooeratf No. Does he say that he has not served his State well and faith fully or what does he offer for thus attempt ing to disturb the peace of the party, and give 10 our active enemies, the whigs, such aid and com fort as he can afford We will tell in his own words his reasons as far as we can find out for such course and triyal indeed they are. The editor must be " hard up'' when he can find no better cause for repudiatipg the nominee of democratic conveniion-when he can only say;
 eff the whole canvass before the convention, the course and declarations of the Arkansas Ban ner, and many of the influential friends of the "nomnee," with the illiberal and offensive com ments of that paper upon the result ofthe Conyen- ton, did not afford convincing proofs that the mo tives of those most active in bringing about the nomination of Johnson, were not wholly personal and in entire disregard of prineipie-the letters which we have received from uarioas parts of the State, informing us that previous to the holding of the Convention, 1t as the settled determination of the leading friends of Col Johnson, in rarious counties to vote for a phig If another had been nominated, furnishes damning evidence of the fact; and in future numbers we shall hold up these facts for the consideration of the democrats of Arkansas
 Now if this means anything it is: first, that the Banner and the friends of Col. Johnson crowed somewhat too loudly after the Convention-that it was offensive, &c. We acknowledged this some time ago and made the amende we thought in the most satisfactory style. The second objection is, that a majority of the Convention ('' those most active in bringing about the nomination of John
 
 prineipie This large bedy of respectable gentle men will no doubt be obliged to the editor of the Intelhgencer for the discovery, but we cannot but believe that their constituents will award to them principles by giving Johnson personally a hearty support spite of the denunciation of a defeated candidate, But another and more cogeat reason for opposition to Johnson is that the editor has learned by rarions letters from rlrious parts of the Sate'' that certain friends of the nominee would have voted for a whig if he were not nomin- ated. This is declaration we have never heard from any one as extensive as our correspondence has been, and while we hays no intention to i'm pute to the editor an attempt to lnislead his ders, feel perfectly satisfied that, if Fournoy, Rust, Byrd, Cross, Conway, RoySton, lzard or some other democrat equally prominent had been nominated, the party would have rallied upon him as they will upon Johnson. We acknowledge that we have heard the unwse and uRgencrous remark more than oace from democrats, that if Geo. ". Clarke tcsre nominated, they would vote for whig but never that they would so violate all party organization if Col Johnson seere not nominated. The spirit of disorganzation was never breathed except in the event Of such result.
 Pending the meeting of the Convention we made no use of these expressions to the prejudice of Gen. Clark. He had an open field and made the best fight he could, but. having failed, he takes away all the magnahimty and manliness of his part of the contest, by throwing bricks at his opj ponent who expected battle from the whigs alone. He steps in between the nominee of aDemocfatic Conyen,ion the choice of his own party, in struggle with the whigs, and administers 10 Col. Johnson what he supposes will be "a dig under the hfh rib. The platform which the editor has se- lected for himself is not enviable one, and we think few will join him in its support. The opin- ion, so far as VIC have heard an expression by democrats, has been one of unqualified disappro- bation of the means he has taken to injure the election of Johnson, while the whigS, of course,