The southern press. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1852-04-13
The southern Rights Party and the De.


ulOSAuSyf
We see il stated inthe Georgia papers of boil
parties that the Democratic Convention, which
recently met at MiIIedgeville, did not commanc
full attendance
One paper says that mol one half of the couE
ties in the State were represented in it," anc
another, favorable to the meeting and its objects
admits that in respect to numbers the Conven'
ton was not so large as we anticipated" One
thing must strike every one familiar with
Georgia politics, and that u.s. the absency Of such
men as Governor MCDONALD, and other distin-
guished State Rights Democrats from that
Convention. The full strength of the party
certainly was not embodied in that meeting.
In the Southern Sentinel, published in Coum-
bus, one of the strongest and staunchest organs
Of the States Rights Democrats, we find the
following explanation of the probable reasons of
the thinness of the meeting and the absence of
the distinguished gentlemen who have hitherto
taken the lead on similar occasions:
The SOUTHERN RIGHTS PARTY AND THE
DEMocRAcY.-We see by the last Times that
meeting of the Democratic party has been held
in this city, at which delegates were appointed
TO attend convention at Milledgeville, for the
purpose of sending delegates to the Baltimore
convention. From the call for said meeting,
and from the small attendance, we presume it
must have repres ented the Democtatic party
proper that is, such portion of the Democrats
as never intended to abandon their national
party affiliations. For we are satisfied that the
LII, - L. 10 -,
posed of Wings and Democrats, could not have
considered themselves included in the invitation,
as the meeting, in that case, must necessarily
have extended beyond t,oenty-about the mum.
Der, we are informed assembled on that occa-
sion. But, Independent of the paucity of num-
bers, the action of the meeting did not represent
those principles of the Southern Rights party of
Georgia which have been so publicly proclaimed
and are so we'll known.
What one Of the wrongs of the South for the.
redress of which we banded ourselves together,
has been atoned for? If we had reason for for
saking national party alliances that we might
devote ourselves singly to the defence of the
South, have we not the same reasons now?
And because political iniquity abounds, and the
love of many is waxing cold, should not the
faithful draw more closely together, and plant
themselves more firmly upon their beloved prin-
cipes-Southern Rights, State sovereignty, and
opposition to federal encroachment?
Why should the Southern Rights party 60 to
Baltimore? Do they expect their wrongs re-
dressed by Rantou, Sumner, and others, who
declare Freesoilsm and Democracy TO be synon-
ymous? We apprehend not; and we but echo
the voice of a large majority Of the Southern
Rights party of Muscogee when we say that
they do not endorse the proceedings Of said
meeting, and that they deem il necessary that
their position should be defined, and themselves
relieved from any suspicion of forsaking their
principles as heretofore made known The
equivocal position in which that meeting places
a large number of the Southern Rights party,
who have formerly acted with the Democratic
party, renders il necessary that meeting should
be called in which they can place themselves
properly before the public, and at least repel
the idea that they are to go for the nominee Of
the Baltimore Convention al all events and to
the last extremity.