Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1853-12-01

purpose. The freesolers were agrees ors, whilst
the southern rights men banded themselves
together to resist aggression. II the statement
Of the Washington Union be true "that the
friends Of the measures of adjustment never
had the strength to elect a president" how
comes it that Franklin Pierce is now the Chief
Magistrate of the United States? Was he not
friend-a fully and thoroughly committed
friend-of those measures? But perhaps it
may be said that he was compromises gen.
eral amnesty-cand;date If that be the reply
of the Washington Union, we would ask that
sapient journal to tell us why it was, and by
what rignt did General Pierce proclaim, in the
face of the nation, on the east front of the
capitol, that all the compromise measures were
strictly constitutional?
The Washington Union says that the demo
cratic party can maintain its ascendency with
out New York, but it cannot maintain its as
tendency with New York diseord in its ranks.
This may be true bullet us ask who gave nation
atty to the New Y ork faction? Whodragged that
controversy before the public? Who digni6ed
it with the name of q the Presidents policy ?"
Who made it a test question of political faith ?
Will the Union answer these questions honestly
and to the point? We will see: but before we
wait to see, we will say that in the first number
of the Sentinel we deprecated the idea that the
odour of nationality should be given to the
New York controversy; and day after day we
labored to separate the administration from
that contest. But all our efforts in that direc.
ton proved to be futile. The Washington
Union, without cause and without provocation,
assaulted Daniel S. Dickinson, who was quietly
at his home, not even present at Syracuse
and day after day it thrust the New York
question-as test question-and, as if speak
ing for men in authority, it undertook to dis
card from the democratic party all who would
not fling their arms around John Van Buren,
and give him fraternal embrace, and swear
to follow his leadership.
fit be true, then, that the democratic party
cannot sustain its ascendency "with New York
discord in its ranks" who is responsible for
scattering that discord broadcast throughout
the confederacy? The very men who now,
since the New York election, whine through
the nose about disafection and harmony, Civ
ing sly stabs all the time!
1t is not true that the Baltimore convention
subscribed to an amnesty. Every man who
presented himself at the Mechanics Hall, at
Baltimore, as delegate to the convention,
submitted his credentials to the proper COM
mittee. The committee did not examine the
delegate as to his political notions. The COM
mittee had no right to submit catechism.
All it could do was to look to the source from
which the credentials emanated. If that source
was democratic, and the appointment was made
in accordance with the usages of the party, the
committee had no discretion-the soundness of
the delegate being a matter between him
and those who sent him to Baltimore When
the Speaker of the House of Representa-
tives asked Mr.. Randolph how old he was,
he replied, "Ask my constituents, SIR" That
answer would have been most appropriate if
any catechising had been attempted at Balti
more. Viewing the matter in this light, and
speaking not from hearsay, but saying what
we do know, we repeat that the Baltimore con-
vention was not as the Washington Union
would hare the country believe, mere ANAL
gamation of factions. 1t was an honest gath
ering of honest men for honest purposes-not
a piratical league for power and place and
plumber AS we said weeks ago, the platform
was not lowered to invite dishonest men to step
on it, on the contrary, it was elevated for the
purpose of excluding factionists and traitors
to nationalize the democracy, and present to
the country pure and honest party, worthy of
the public confidence.