The Empire County argus. [volume] (Coloma, El Dorado County, Cal.) 1853-1857, 1853-12-03

to VI WHOSE NOle
into the suffrages of the other side. Independent
however, of all the unprincipled means and dis
graceful influences used against him, Governor Big
Ter was triumphantly returned to the station which,
for two years. he had, in the opinion of the State,
SO faithfully and honorably filed by majority of
more than 1000 greater than at his previous cleo
ton. proud approval for him and his friends to
point to. and crushing rcbuke to those who had
connived against him.
1t would be natural, perhaps, to enquire at this
pont, the cause of this foamng hatred, this acrd
and unstinted malevolence, this apparent phrenzy
of revenge against Gov Bgler in particular; but
we spared the investigation by the fact, that
those who waged it were disappointed seekers after
profit and by the inference which their defeat, at
his hands, affords.
But 1T is needless to enlarge upon the extraordl-
nary nature Of the struggle or to dwell upon the
more than brilliant character Of the result. En-
barassed and crippled as at the outset, the
issue takes the shape of the miraculous, and in our
gratitude for its benefits we arc more disposed to
ascrbe it to the hand of Providence, put forth to
protect favored state from too early disgrace,
than to any special efforts merits of our own.
1t now only remains to say few words as to the
position of the misguided men who stood aloof from
the contest, who joined the ranks of the enemy
and sought to mar it to our hands. In the course
of our remarks we have spoken of them all. by the
term SeceielS, but though we insist upon the ap-
merely neutral to the active traitors of the fight,
there is discrimination to be made between them
which cannot be passed by with justice
We desire to make this discrimination in favor of
those who exhibited the bold demeanor and manly
courage to openly enlist against us and while we
can conceive the possibility that some of them may
have been actuated by mistaken belief that they
were right, we can only ascribe the lowest motives
and meancst instincts TO those who fought in the
dark, cyaded our appeals cavesdropped on our
councils, and served the enemy not as soldiers, but
rs spies But while we draw this distinction for a
moral purpose, must assign to both the same
amount of apostacy There are no degrees in de-
serion. There can be no neutrality in the field Of
battle. More especially are those soldiers bound
who have received an advance of pay, and we need
only to refer to history for evidence that "merce-
naries1 and " free communions," of sorts who have
attempted neutrality by standing idle in the hour
OF conflict, or by marching to the other side, have
invariably been hung when the battle was over
One is by giving supplies; the other by giving per-
sonal service. When either of these is withheld by
those who owe them it must be taken as with
drawal from the cause. Party organization
tolerate interrupted allegiance-no shifting pol
icy. 1t depends for its existence continuous
vice 1t must be maintained unbroken under all
circumstances, for the sake of the principles it
serves, and in that view, it becomes sacred as
principle itself The man who abandons guard,
takes part with the invader and he who, with
means to spare. suffers garrison to capituate for
the want of food, cannot expect an invitation to
their board when they possess an abundance.
We have reflections TO add, and we cheerfully
return to the congratulations with which we set
out.
The first privilege of victory is to rejoice over sue
cess the profoundest pleasure of patriotism is to
regard the champions of the fight and the best
service to the steadts is to expel the unworthy and
to brand the deserter The former of these instincts
share in common with you all but the grand
powers Of reward and punshments reside in the
common sense of the Democratic masses, and to
their intelligence and unwavering justice the en-
tire subject may be safely committed
DAVID &. BRoDERICK, JOHN MIDDLETON,
DAVID MAHoNEY, }. w. SwEAsEY,
J. H. MCKUNE, J. W. HALL.
G. w. Colby,
DAVID C. BRODERICK, Prest
F. P. TRACY, Secy.
A QUEEN AND A PREsIDENT.-Withn the few
last months two incidents have occurred, which
srikingly display the difference between royalty
and republcanism. One was the opening of the
New York Crystal Palace. by President Pierce
the other the visit of Queen Victoria to the Dublin
exhibition. With the events of the former read
ers are familiar. During his ride to the Palace
President Fierce accidentally had his hat smashed
in, and rode with it unconscously in that condition
for some distance; and after the opening exercises
were over at the Palace the platform where he
stood was invaded by his fellow citizens eager to
grasp his hand not all Of whom were particularly
cdnsidcrate. Mark the difference at Dublin. The
Queen was received IN room, prepared for the pur
pose lined with white satin. and adorned with busts
ofherself and husband. At her presentation to the
people, she singled out Mr.. Dargan the protector
of the Exhibition, and shook his hand, ut which
gracious condescension" as the English papers
hot tlo tl,n
wife looking down from the gallery, and the honest
people appear to have been affected almost to tears
1t seems, at first thought nearly incredible, that
between the Anglo Saxon communities, descended
from the same stock, and resembling each other so
closely in most particulars there should be this diff
Later in the day, itappears. Queen Victoria drove
to the country seat Of MIR Dargan, few miles from
Dublin, and spent half an hour in II call ON the
gentlcman's family The English papers are over
powered by this gracious condescension' also
And considering that ii is the first time the queen
has ever visited an untitled subject, the act looked
at from the British point of view, really kind
one. 1t was however, well deserved, as but for
Mr.. Dargan, the Dublin Exhibition would have
fallen through BESIDES in honoring him, the
Queen, as representing the State, honors labor,
which he and the Exhibition represent. But what
Il eer would be heard it, in this country, the visit
of President to private individual should be call
ed, by any journalist gracious condescension,' y
Gracious indeed. Why, the poorest day-laborer, if
he be good citizen and an honest man, is as wor
thy in all respects as the wealthiest. He who does