Martinsburg gazette. [volume] (Martinsburg, Va. [W. Va.]) 1833-1855, 1851-04-15
DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE.


zz<E-zr=a=-====-===-==-=====
DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE.
In relation to the nomination Of the Hon.
Henry BEDIsaER as candidate for Con-
gress from this district, the Spirit of Jeffer-
son says:
ave cannot say that the Convention was
altogether harmonious in its deliberation. or
united in its action. The public senti nent
of this District, for the last several mouths
has 80 clearly pointed to the nominee Of the
Convention as the man whom the District
desired as their candidate for Congress, that
the friends, no less than the several other
aspirants in the District, have regarded their
opposition as forlorn hope and have there
by been driven TO extremties. Many who
were opposed TO the nomination Of this indi-
vidual, in the first place refused to go into
the Convention in the second place those
who did, satisfied Of their weakness, threw
every obstacle and difficulty in the way of
harmonious action, and calm and deliberate
councils.
The Winchester yirginian says:
There was Convention on Thursday
last, composed Of delegates from six counties
of the District. The representation from
them was anything but full, owing to the no.
toriously general impression that no nomina-
tion would be made, and that the party would
be left at rest during the six months inter-
vening before the month of the election, quiz
city to shape its wishes, preference and or
ganization. This conviction not only kept
two Of the strongest Democratic counties
Hampshire and Morgan, casting Demo-
cratic vote of 873, away. but it is also kept
ut home nearly the entire country delega-
tions Of Frederick, Warren and Page
Hampshire and Morgan Counties were not
represented)
The majority of about one tenth Of the
whole number Of votes cast was obtained
solely by the unanimity Of the delegates from
Jefferson and Page. The three counties
named cast at the last Presidential election
I'LL votes. Now, if to these we add the
S73 of Hampshire and Morgan, we find q
5S4 out of the 1908 votes of the whole
District, in faror of posiponhg nomina-
ton ;; majority of two to one! This little
fact however, lay as light as feather on the
consciences of the nominators. They did not
even care to secure for the candidate chose n
two thirds of the votes cast in the Conven-
ton, according to the rule which has hereto.
fore been followed Much less did they OBJ
tain for him majority of the whole vote of
the District, but were content to offer him
backed by lS45 votes, considerably less than
one-half. lg
We must do the gentlemen the justice to
say that they admitted Hampshire and Nor
gan were not bound by the nomination.
But in that case, why, if they sought the
Union and success of the party, did they
make one at all Why did they totally ig-
more two counties whose Democratic vote
more than covers the Democratic majority in
the District?
The proceedings state that resolution
pledging the whole meeting to support the
nominee was passed unanimously" This
is true in words, but not in sense; for the
simple reason that those opposed did no.
vote at all. They virtually withdrew from
all part in the business. as many of them
had done before, on the rejection of the mo-
ton for adjournment.
1t is superAuous to say that we do not
consider Mr.. Bedinger the regular nominee
of the Democracy of the 10th District. 1t
is equally so, we hope, to tell our readers
that our obvious and sole purpose has been
to secure unanimity of action, which can on.
ly be permanently attained by justice to all
views and all sections. That object, we
feel authorized to add, will be sought by an.
other-a regular and mplete--Convention
to be held in August or September