Iowa capitol reporter. [volume] (Iowa City, Iowa) 1841-1855, 1854-08-09

Card.


Nh. Enron: In your paper Of July 2e:h. is
an article addressed to three of the delegates
who withdrew from the convention at Marengo,
and an appeal to the Democracy warning them
not to be seduced from their allegiance. but to
ssmaintain the integrity Of their organisation
and the supremacy Of their principles I"
So far rs am concerned in this matter,
would state to the authors, that the assertions
and allegations made in this puerile address, III
relation 10 the doings at that convention, are
10 the very letter false. 1t is stated in the ad
dress that If low a county had been fully repre-.
sented. YOU would have gone for their men, but
that she was not therefore yon nominated
FAIEs Why this noninatlonf Was it not al
legged by you as delegates, that il Iowa county
would 90 for WoRKxAk, you would 60 ioa
BErM? Yes, it was. Why violate your faithy
4 ! answer that the delegates from Iowa were
instructed to 60 for CLARK: therefore these self
conceited delegates violated their faith tow ards
| Iowa county, because she instructed her dele
| gates for CLARK. The idea, held out that there
was probability Of a candidates being select
ed in Iowa county, with their concurrence
| (what sweli,) was only trap set to eaten
votes. It was concocied, made up, sgreed to,
and every arrangement made before leaving
Iowa Citv, that FALEs was TO be candidate.
Iowa county was fully represented, every
delegate in attendance, ready to 60 into con-
/ yention for the nominations. The convention
was organized, WORKMAN was proclaimed
candidate without any opposition, there being
no opposing candidate. They balloted and
lo!l what sighti Fourteen delegates were
man and 4 for Cls<k. Two delegates Withdrew
before voting, LUAxs and nyseh, lsaviag only
! 10 delegates 10 maize Is votes. Now, how Thu
: ingenuity or practiced skill Of the perscni
signing this document, can unrsvel this mys
terry, leave 10 their guilty consciences to se
il right.
knew it. Come GU, like men and own it,
I. Don't attemptto get out Of this matter, as yo'
!, oot in with The nomination, but come out lik
men. aud say there was fraud. there being on
: more vote polled than there were delegates I
u vote.
Another paragraph in this noble production
= emanating not far from stone house on IN
west side Of the river, is specimen Of wha
> kind of products grows in that soil. Inc ian
guage there used is false a. hell and you al
y know it. Your portion Of the delegates ma
V not been falsifed; nothing but the plain, ur
. vanished truth was uttered in the address,
g So far as COVER is concerned. vote for hi
y II work for him and the party, but do not
J, can not-shall not vote tor mixed up mess
q effervescences, a combination of Whigger
9 Free Soilism, Know Nothingism, and sma
q | scripkling Of all the isms of the day, for II
al purpose Of gratifying the malicious sp:een OF
se man, because he didn't get the Land Office
!! In paragraph 2nd Of this noble epistle, v
81 are accused Of boiling. called renegades d.
ID because we had the manliness to WITHDRAW
? and not sell ourselves for a small "mess
ne uottage." We withdrew upon the princip
as that man is known by the company he keep
p. The assertion that the sole reason OF our witt
70 drawal was because CLARK was not nominate
is false. CLARK could command votes &c
., tain. and if some of the combined friends
g, WORKMAN had been as true to their integrity
IN they were to him. CLARK would have got Il
o. nomination, as 2 of the votes cast for Won
ne NAN, were pledged not ten ninues before Il
T. organization, to go for Clark, but having mo
= respect for WORKMAN than they had for thu
+ integrity, therefore the result.
10 P.S. now leave this or a portion of the
d. to be the recipients OF their own putyid co
20 sciences. l. V. DENNIS.