The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1853-11-28
PRICE TWO CENTS.

but so resolu!ely were they met, that nothing was
gained to them BY such course and on the very
days when the coalition senatorial tickets were
elected QS49-5O), in the counties Of Mid icsex and
Worcester, by decisive msjorities Mr. Palfrey was
beaten in the fourth district composed Of towns 10.
Gated in those counties, BY heavy votes 1t is true
that Mr. Palfey got SONS democratic votes at almost
every trial and it is curious fact that Of the men
who threw such votes, ssmo are now Mr.. Frothing-
hams stest supporters whife 0thevs have been pre-
ferred for office: by the administration, over men who
or the whig candidate. Mr.. Nrothrinsham
had nothing to do with TIE con test in the
fourth district until Mr.. Palfrey had lven struck
down from the high position that Ae had occupied at
ITS commencement; and then he came into q only az
candidate- as worker. At the fnai scene,
when his friends left Kim, in 1851, the votes that
rather larger numbers to the whig than to the free
soil candidate, which woald not seem to indicate
desire for Q coalition the part of ths democracy
TO elect fee soiler to Congress. For such m1n
10 ehde avOr 10 tnr0T upon some OF his former sup
poriers the odum that is now supposed % attach to
coalltonem, at national election, shows that somc
people have no more regard for truth than they have
feelings OF gratitude. coalition was never thought
of by the democratic party in the Fourth district,
and the only nomination that Mr. rockingham, ever
accepted against the coalition, was "bolting's
ticket for Representatives,, in Charlest0wn, seveYal
months after the close Of the Congressional election
The last time that Mr.. Frothngham acted with
the coAlitio1sts was in March, 1853, when hcwas
chosen delegate to the Constitutional Convention.
The support that he ther received voluntary on
their part bat II he dislsked the coalition 80 hear
tiy as he row says, why did he not refuse to accept
Office a. its hands? believe there is no er-
quite SO far as that.
M purpose in naratng these facts is TO let your
Southern readers see that, In striving to play tas
anti abolition dodge, such gentlemen as Mr.. Froth-.
ingham and Gen. Gushing are not acting with COM
mon honesty. If the coalition was so bad thing aS
TO warrant the ore in calling for, and the other in<
writing, ukAse forbo ding democrats to vote against
the wings in Massachusetts effectively and arraying
the whole patronage of the government against the
democratic State and county and town organiza-
tionsif it was as bad as that, say, why did not
these gentlemen, VINO were never, supposed to be
Why did they accept offices at the hands of the
coalitlcH! The South must see thati it is treated
like child when it is sought to impose
upon il by so shallow device as that which
General Gushing has been engaged in playing.
and in which, | have good reason for stating, tho
President had no part. The democrats here make
broad distinction between the President and tho
former, whose business must keep him constantly
employed-leaving him no leasure to attend to such
matters the regulation of State electionsAas been
deceived by the latter.
Were not this letter already too long, would fur.
nsh you with some extracts from the article In the
Boston Post OF July l6, lS49, in which q union Of
the democratic ard free soil parties of
was recon- mnended and urged. But they will keep,
and perhaps may send you on the whole article.
In the mean time let me say to Southern gentlemen.
that there is scarcely democrat of any consequence
in this State who did not have something to do with
the coalition, and that the measure Of mans de-
nunciat0n Of it nOw-that man belonging to the de-
mocacyis also the measure of his support of it ono
two or three years ago. ALGoMA.