Weekly North Carolina standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1850-1858, 1852-10-20
MR.. BADGERS LETTER.

+ -. tsss -6.S.-
The letter Of Hon. GEoRoE E. BADGER, recently
published in the Register this City, contains some
! curious points which we propose to notice. Mr..
Badger sets out BY declaring that it Was his inten-
ton to have visited the Club and made speech.
But, he says: - .sss st
control, froD doing what had thus proposed deem
proper. in order 10 prevent correct mistake or
misstatement respecting my position and views, to
submit this communication to ycu and TO ask that it
may be read to the Club
1t must be a humiliating reflection to the friends
of Gen. Scott in the State, that one Of its Wing
U. S. Senators deems it necessary to declare his
position :" in order to prevent correct mistake"
ranks is great that ordinary silence is regarded
with suspicion. So many prominent men Of that
party, looking to principle and patriotism rather
than to party, have repudiated the Seward nomi-
nee of the Convention, that those who resolve to
hang on find it Necessary to declare the fact, in Or
der to escape suspicion Of disafection. But this
poin. is so common that it is not very curious, and
we will pass it over.
After declaring that Mr. Fillmore was his first
choice, the Hon. Senator continues:
II will add, in all frankness, that, probably, no
man in the United States was disappointed, not
to cay dissatisfied than was, when that gentleman
was passed over.'
Why was Mr.. Badger dissatisfied Was it be-
cause he had no confidence in the fitness of Gen.
Scott? Was it because, like Southern Wings gen
orally, he objected to the Seward influences which
caused Mr.. Fillmore to be "passed over?" Wasi it
because he saw the South ridden over and trampled
under foot by the anti zvery fanatics ofthe North
But Mr.. Badger lays great stress on the fact that
General Scott is the nominee of the Convention
Granted: but who procured him that nomination 2
We answer, (and Mr.. Badger himself cannot deny
it) the anti-savery, anti-compromise wing of the
Wing party. He admits that Gen. Scott did not
write any thing pledging himself to the Compro-
mise before his nomination, but says neither did
Gen. Pierce. Let us look at that moment.
Gen. Scott was repeatedly importuned to declare
himself upon the Compromise measures. He had
been in no public station where his course must
necessarily have given some indication OF his po-
| sition. There was no way to get at him but by his
own declayations, and either he sewed up his own
naouslss <sawa,la eexed it up for him. He refused
to speak out and as very natural consequence
Southern Wings denounced him and opposed his
nomination almost to man. We hazard but lit
tie, if anything, in asserting that Messrs Mangum
and Stanly were the only two Scott men in North
| Carolina previous to the assembling of the Wing
Convention and the cause If their opposition is
| not left to conjecture-they themselves declared
that they had not confidence in his fidelity to the
Constitution, under which the rights Of the South
are safe, and that they believed he was under the
influence, or the tool, Of the "higher-aw faction
of unprincipled knaves and misguided fools. S.
| But Gen. Pierce did not answer Mr.. Scots let
ter, says Mr.. Badger True, but his silence pro-
ceeded from a very different cause from that of
Gen. Scott. Gen. Pierce was silent because he did
not desire the nomination; Gen. Scott was silent
because he did desire the 9esaination and feared
to lose it by speaking. No declaraiea from GGea.
1 Pierce necessary. He had been in public sta
| ton andshis views were known. Would any man
apply to Gen. Pierce for his views on slavery after
reading his speech on Mr.. ,Calhoun's resolutions,
. which we published in the Standard of the 9th
instant! And to that was added the well known
fact, of recent occurrence that Gen. Pierce procured
the resembling of the nomination of Atwood fol
. Governor of New: Hampshire because he took
ground against the fugitive-slave law. sf 49,
Mr. Badger resorts to another pretext likewise
distinguished for its sophstry. He says true
Seward, Greely and others of Abolition notoriety
support Gen. Scott but that Hallett, Van Buren
and others support Gen. Pierce. Yes but Seward
Greely and Co. nominated Gen. Scott, thrust him
upon the South, not only contrary toits will, but
in opposition to its most strenuous eneavors to pre-
vent it whereas the Southern States first brought
forward General Pierce and urged his nomination
! Gen. Scott was nominated by. the North over the
head of the favorite Of the South while General
Pierce was nominated by the South over Gen. Cass
the favorite of the. North. If the Van Burens
&c choose to support him under these circumstan
ces, charity would lead to hail it as sign of re-
turning sense and justice their part. It is equiv
alent to renunciaon on their part of their former
course; and if sincere in it, may be regarded as
favorable omen. When repentance shall have
brought forth its fruits in them, and time and r !
shall have proved their sincerity, they MAJ maj
not be taken back into the fold from who they had
SO far parted that point can be deter q hereafter
7 But one of MIR. Badgers tents in favor o
Gen. Scott is, that |" he u born in the South
True, but he has So decided preference fol
tile North, having The place Of his birth--the
Isouth- tal his residence at the North
Mr.. Badger U s. Senator, and looked to by
4 his party as high minded, honorable politician
descends to- lty nick -names and speaks as glibly