The southern press. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1852-05-28

pies il paramount in the minds of Southern men
, to other obstacles less formidable. Between
Gen. Cass and Gen Scott, Southern Democrats
will support the former-many, however, will in
: this event support neither. 1t is but just and
{ right that the Baltimore convention should
thoroughly understand the feelings of the
, Southern Democracy towards Gen. Cass; and
it is the duty Of the convention, before making
nominations to ponder well this relation. Gen.
Cass has been once honored by the Democratic
party with the nomination, and was defeated
He was warmly supported by Southern Demo
Gratis, whose zeal was unbounded. His defeat
entailed disaster upon the party and the country,
never before so affiictingly felt The marks of
that defeat will lnger on the party and the
country as long rs they exist"
~ The following article from the pen off vet
eran Democrat, having been offered to the editor
of the Union and refused, has been brought to us.
with a request for its insertion in our columns.
To The Editor Of The Union:
SIR: was not only much surprised on read
ing the communication of" Union Democrat y
in your paper of Saturday last, but was equally
go with your remarks at the head Of the article.
! You say that you do not =" wish to be under
stood as having formed definite opinion in re.
gard to the delicate subject which IL (the com
municaton) discusses, but that the friends of
the Democratic party may in good season see
the difficulties likely to grow out of the appear
ance at Baltimore of two sets of delegates to
the convention, deriving their credentials from
two different party organizations, each claiming
to be Democratic" And you add that in the
sectional controversy at the South the past
summer, you regarded both the parties as hav
ing temporarily abandoned their former organ-
zation."
! The writer in question calls himself A
Union Democrat" which would seem to mean
that there is an organized party known as the
Union Democratic party; and this must be your
understanding when you speak of " two sets of
delegates to the convention deriving their ere
denials from t,uo different party organizations,
each claiming 10 be Democratic" But sir, beg
leave to express the opinion that it will be news
to the public that there ever has BEEN or is now,
an organized Democratic party known by the
name, style or description Gas the lawyers say)
of the Democratic Union party. There was in
two or three of the Soulirarn States, a party
calling itself the Constitutional Union yarty,
which was made up of the Wings, generally, OF
those States, aud small minority of Democrats;
and which party FRUSTRATED for the time being,
the Democracy in two, if not three States, and
brought into the Senate of the United States
two Wings where there would otherwise have
been two Democrats.
i But, during The past summer you regarded
both the parties as having temporarily aban-
doned their former organization" AS you
speak of two parties which had previous organ
izations, yOu mu of necessity mean the Demo
cratic and Wing parties. How had the Demo
cratic party abandoned it's organization? Were
not Gov. Mcdonald and Col. Davis nominated
and supported by the Democratic party, as such,
in the States of Gsorgi, and Mississippi, re-
spectiyely? OH but those parties called them
selves Southern Rights puties So they did
sometimes; and 80 has the Democracy of the
country often been Gale the Jeffer. oman party,
the Madisonian party and the Jacksoni party
and it has always claim TO be State Rights
party Now, the 'erm Sotthern Rights has
been constantly used al the South as synoni
nous with STATE II tights; and no claim has been
set up which was not alledged 10 have been
guaranteed by the Constitution to all the States
of The Union
Let US look at another point in the case.
There were in the State of Georgia at least
twenty Democratic newspapers and perhaps
nearer thirty, and all those except one (at the
residence of Mr.. Cobb supported Goverro
Mcdonald, while not single Wing paper in
the State was in his favor. In Mississippi, out
of about the same number Of Democratic pa
pers, have supported Mr.. Foote, save ono which
was bought up, and placed in charge ola Wing
editor; a. nota single Wing paper supported
Col. Davis. Does this show any great division
of the Democratic party, or an abandonment Of
lis organization, in either of the two States in
question! Or, does it merely show, that small
minority Of Democrats went over to the Wing
party, and, with it, formed ne,o party with the
name of "The Constitutional Union party""
i Now, sir, few words upon the statements
and opinions of your correspondent. lie says:
"In Georgia theye never was systematic or
ganization of tie Democratic party. Some
times her delegates to the national convention
have been appointed by State conventons-at
others by district conventions-at Others by
Legislative caucuses and so with other nominal
tons, and other party proceedings"
Fl Here, them it is admitted that in Georgia there
,oas a Democratic party; that it held State con-
ventions district conventions, and Legislative
caucusses: and. moreover, that it regularly sent
delegates to the Democratic national conven-
tions. But, with all this, we are seriously told
that this party never had any" systematic organi
gallon" WHY not? Because, forsooth, its
delegates TO the national conventions have not
always been selected in the same way. Then, of
course, it follows, upon this principle, that in no
State can there be Democratic party sysienat;-
caiiy orgarssd, if it has not always selected its
delegates in the same way. .,n
1t is said to be moofed point, whether ma
jority of the Democrats went into the Union or
the Southern Rights party. IL IS a well known
{ fact that the Wings have claimed and, believe,
do still, to be the true Democratic party of the
country, and have even, at times, assumed the
name of Democratic Wings. Well, this claim
presents n,ooted point and so may any qucs
ton become no.tei one, however plain and
simple it may be, provided any one chooses to
, moot it. But cases of this kind should be deci-
ded-where there really is anything to be deci-
ded--upon the plain and simple ground of COM
mon sense and known facts
The case of the two sets OF delegates from
New York to the convention of l84s, is not at
all IN point The Democratic party in New
York, at that time, WAS still altogether. But
there was struggle in the party IN regard TO
the choice of delegates and portion of il con-
| landing that the frat set were not fairly ap-