Daily American telegraph., 1852-01-16
rhs .Union y and the Coalition.

& II
The " Union" In reply to our article o. yes
terday, says that We have accused iaisely inc
Washington g Union,' aud adds:
"We cannot but express our surprise that
Gen. Green should have commenced ms MUMMY
ing process by declaration that 'nere was
coalition between Mr.. Webster and Mr.. Foote,
and that the washington Union was sustaining
this coalition as necessary to the preservation OF
the Democratic party"
AS TO the coalition, does not the "Union"
know that Mr. Webster is the candidate for the
Presidency Of the Union party of New York and
of New England? Does not the editor Of the
!" Unionp know that the Union meeting in Castle
Garden was got up by the partisans of Mr.. Web
ster THAT the proceedings of the Castle Garden
committee have been regulated by Mr.. Webster's
partisans, with a view to his elevation to the
Presidency? Does not the "Union" know that
the political wire-workers in Congress who got up
the Compromise, as the basis of the organization
Of new party platform for the Presidential
election, got up and signed written pledge,
binding themselves to support no one for the
Presidency who did not approve Of the Compro-
mise? And was not Gen. Foote one of the most
active in preparing and getting signatures to that
pledge? And did not the 'Union" throw its
whole power and influence, as the organ Of the
Democratic party, into Gen. Foote'S scale, and
thus secure his election as Governor of Missis-
sppi? Will the Union deny that the defeat
of Gen. Davis in Mississippi, of Gov. Trousdale
in Tennessee, and of Gov. Mcdonald in Georgia.
was owing in part to the active efforts of the
q Union" to establish the Compromise as the
Democratic platform And does not the " Union
know that not single well-informed Democrat
south of Mason and Dixon's line, approved of
all the measures which, taken together, consti-
tuted that platform?
If the sUnion" will answer these questions
seriatim and truly, the readers Of the " Union" "
will see that our declaration, that there was CO.
be established by the testimony of the 81 Union "
ITSELF and further, that the g Union " has labor
ed to create belief that this coalition platform is
the platform of the Democratic party.
But why does the q Union" dodge the printing ?
Do the editors hope to blind the eyes of Congress
and of the people by revivinga prejudice against
nullifcation? Does the &C Union" desire to revive
the uScuSSlOn Oh UeI. JackSOn prOclamaUlOn,
and the time when Mr.. Webster and his parti-
sans erected triumphal arches in honor of Gen.
Jackson's progress through New England, and
inscribed thereon-'sT THE DOCTRINE OF THE
PROCLAMATION is THE DOCTRINE OF NEW
ENGLAND?" If so, we would remind Major Dom
elson that, although we have no desire to disturb
the ashes of the dead he will find that there is some
difference between the influence of President at
the head of dominant party, armed with the dis
bursement of large sums of money and of the
honors Of this government, and of the same man
in his cold grave. Let the dead be dead. No
friend of Gen. jackson will thrust his name into
The discussion of these times, or the conflicts of
coming events. If the I" Union" desires to unite
md sustain the party of which it aspircs to be
the organ, it must not expect to blow hot and TO
blow cold, as suits the purposes of those who
blow its "belio,cS" 1t must neither deny nor
advocate the coalition between Webster and Foote
For what we care, it may take the printing as a
reward for the past and AS the condition of future
service; but it must not betray the country to
Webster and Foote, nor to Benton and Van Buren,
1t shall not, if VIC can prevent it.