Richmond daily times. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1853, 1852-06-10

Gen. Pierce and the Scott Catechism.
The New York Commercial Advertiser makes
the following remarks on the Democratic nomina-
ton for the Presidency:
In canvassne this first party movement in the cam
pagn it would be unwise to overlook another fact
Each of the rejected candidates. Cass Buchanan Marcy
Butler Houston Lane, and Dickinson wrote formal re-
ply Tor publication Mr. Scott committing themselves
fully and unequivocaly the fnay othe Compromises.
Yet even this did them from an ignomnlous
lection Mr. Pierce wrote no such letter. and the Con
venton called him from his comparative obscurty and by
unanimous offered him the nomination Yet this
Convention have passed resolutions expressing full
approval ofthose measures This deep scheme. When
the South demands evidence that the Democratic candi
date sound upon that point these resolutions will be
produced. When the North complains IL the opposite
direction, they will be reminded that the Convention
marked with dsapprova every man who had pie ICED
himself by the Scott correspondence to veto legisa
ton that would disturb the Compromises So that the
platform is swung upon central pivot equlpolsed by
the candidate the side and the resolutions on the
other, and be made to incline either way the
cessty of the may require 1t OF course Is not our
business to inquire whether Mr.. Scott his hook
the instgation of Others laid for the cand
dates with the understanding that their letters IN reply
should be made the instrument OF their political death
and whether by Mr. Pierce avoided the trap
We only deal with the facts that the Convention re-
jected every candidate who had committed himself by
pledge, and took up one that had not
The Scott correspondence was introduced by
the Enquirer with great flourish of trumpets as
constituting the true Democratic Platform. A
public pledge to veto a repeal OF the Fugitive
Saws, Law required of each of the candidates
in advance Of the nomination, and it uniyer-
sally understood that Mr.. Scott, the Enquirer and
the Virginia Democracy, insisted upon su.h a
pledge as a sine qua non. This was the 'strue
Democratic Platform, upon which they stood a
fortnight ago. But where do they stand now
n
they are pledged, come up to the standard of or
thodoxy which they themselves prescribed! Has
he stood the Scott test! Has he been made to lie on
the bed prepared by our Virginia Procrustes for all
the Democratic aspilants, and upon which the un-
fortunate limbs of Messrs. Buchanan, Cas-, Doug
las and company, racked and tortured ever
unto death! Ia a word, did Gen. Pierce publicly
pledge himeIf before his nomination to veto &
repeal ofthe Fugitive slave law We hear vague
rumors to the effect that he responded to Mr.
SCOTS call upon him, but up to this hour his letter.
ifhe wrote one, has not the light, have the
public been favored with the slightest intimation Of
its contents What private assurances the occu-
pants of the Scott platform may have received
that Gen Pierce stood with them, we know not
but certain it Is that no public pledge to veto the
Fugitive slave law was given either by him
self or others prior to his nomination. We thinl
it highly probable that Gen. Pierce did respond
to the interrogatories propounded to him. but i
so, it is somewhat mysterious that his answer
should not yet have been made public. If his let
ter had not been received when the Baltimore
Convention nominated him, how could those pol
iticians unite in the nomination who had in
sisted upon preliminary pledge from the candi
dates on the fugitive slave question IT, on the
other hand, his answer was received previous tt
the nomination, why was it not published or reat
TO the Conventionl
Csss, Buchanan, and the remainder OF the ba
@ RS dozen, had been made to show their hand