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

We SOC it stated in the Georgia papers of both
recently met at Milledgevie, did not command
a full attendance.
One paper says that mot one half of the cour-
ties in the State were represented in it J" and
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 is, 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 Colum-
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 Milledgevile, 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 represented 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
great body of the Southern Rights party, CON-
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 tt0enfy-abOut the num-
Der, we are informed, assembled on that occa-
sion. But, Independent of the pnucity of num-
bers the action of the meeting did not represent
those principles of the Southern Rights party of
Georgia which have been 80 publicly proclaimed
and are so well known.
What one of the wrongs of the South, for the
redress of which we banded ourselves together,
has been atoncd for? If we had reason for for
saking national party alliances TINT we might
devote ourselves sngly to the defence of the
South, have we not the same reasons now!
And because political iniquty 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-
ciples-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 Rantoul, Sumner, and Others, who
declare Freesoilism and Democracy to be synon-
ymous! We apprehend not; and we but echo
the voice of 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 it 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
large number of the Southern Rights party,
who have formerly acted with the Democratic
party, renders it 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 90 for the nominee of
the Baltimore Convention at all events and to
the last extremity.