The Democratic sentinel and Harrison County farmer. [volume] (Cadiz, Ohio) 1851-1852, 1851-08-27
George E. Pugh--His position on
the New Constitutional Whig
Falsehood nailed to the Counter

IOOO1SO Az' uSo Ibid pOo1I4Ou Ol
the New Constitutional Whig
Falsehood nailed to the Counter
1t has time and again been charged by
the whig press, that GEORGE E, PUGH,
was opposed tothe adoption of the New Con-
stitution. To put this slapder at rest we
submit to our readers the following, which
was furnished to, the editor of the Ohio
Statesman, by gentleman who was present
at the late Democratic State Convention,
"When the vote was about to taken on
the nomination Of a candidate for Attorney
General, Col. Sawyer Of Auglaize, rose and
said that he had heard a charge made
against one of the candidates for that office,
lwhiehhe wished settled 9 He alluded Il. the
charge that George Z. Pugh had either yo-
ted against, the new Constitution, or else
being opposedto its adoption, had refused
to vote at all. If either charge was true,
he COL Sawyer] could not support Mr..
Pugh, and he demanded of hesfriends ofthat
candidate to, state the facts to the end that
if slander, the SANDER should be put down,
but if true, the Convention should be able to
vote accordingly. A 20 7*"'' "at7't, %.
f. The cry was then made for Mr.. Roll cof
Hamiltons and that gentlemen mounting y
bench, responded:
No man, be said, in that convention was
more able, to brand this assertion as a Sian
der than himself He knew Mr. Pu9h to
have been the warm, the steadfast and con-
slant friend of the New Constitution. When
he said this it was equally due to truth to
say, that Mr.. Pugh, as Well as thousands Of
other Democrats in sold Hamilton, !" would
have preferred a1constitution more radical
especially on the subject of Banking, than
the one adopted on the 9Th, of June; but he
and they advocated it,, because it was more
in consanance with the progressive spirit Of
the age, thanthe old one, Mr. Pugh did
not, he said vote for the new Constitution,
and why he did not he Mr. Roll would in
form the Convention, and if blame was to
rest on the shoulders of any one, it might
rest on him, Mr.. Roll, he alone was to
The day of the election had been set apart
for the trial of case, in which he had been
engaged with corporation in in Hamilton
county. AS Clerk of the Court Of Common
Pleas, the law forbade him from practising
law and hence he had engaged the services
of Mr.. Pugh. Anxious to be at the polls,
Mr.. Pugh had tried to get the trial deferred
to another day, but failed In the perfor-
nance ofhis duty to his client, he was for
ced to be absent from the place where he
could vote The trial lasted longer than
either he Mr., Roll or his counsel expect
ed. The moment it was over Mr.. Pugh took
a buggy and drove some four miles to tie
place Of election, and to his regret found
himself toolate by some five or ten minutes.
This, said Mr.. Roll was the head and front
of Mr.. Pugh's offending. He had attended
la lawsuit against a corporation and in doing
his sworn duty as an Attorney had failed to
arrive in time to vote. Had the loss of that
vote defeated the new constitution, he (Mr. !
Roll would have blamed himself for it, for
under the circumstances, he knew Mr.. +. |
was not to blame. AS one Of the members |
of the Constitution Convention, he Mr.. Roll |
had aided in framing the constitution, and
under the belief that it was, the best that
could be got, he had voted for its adoption
by the Convention, and had advocated and
voted forit when it was adopted by the peo-
pie, and no man that knew him would dare
say that he was not sincere He mentioned
this fact for the purpose Of saying that he
was not more sincere and ardent supporter
OF the new constitution than was George Il.
Pugh. He trusted the Delegate from Atl-
glaze was satisfied that the charge was
SANDER.
ftMr SAWYER pprfectlXy cotis GaI -