The Feliciana Democrat. (Clinton, La.) 1855-186?, 1857-06-27
For the Fcliciana Democrat.
A NEW CONVENTION.


The Baton Rouge Advocate Of the 23rd inst on
my communication in relation to new Convention
in the last number of the Democrat makes the fol-
lowing commcns
"For the argument. admit the truth of this state
mcnt agree that "a Proxy DclcCaeH il right and
the Official proceedings of the Convention wrong
He reduces the vote cast In making the nomination
to ga majority in the Disrict-of which Mr.. Da-
wilson received %. The withdrawal of q minority,
by no rule known to Democratic assembly, can
nulli'y the action of the remaining majority; and in
this instance, after the number had been reduced to
20, fifteen votes would have made the nomination
Just as binding as II the whole SO had been cast and
the nominee had received 20 Of them. No rcasona-
bic mind will deny this proposition. II is princ-
pie as just ~ 1t is Democratic, and one which every
Democrat must maintain. Those who left the Con-
ycnton on the 10Th instant. are alone responsible
Tor the Acknowledgement of the parishes they repre-
scntcd, and the charge from them that the nominee
received minority of The votes Of die district comes
with peculiar bad grace, inasmuch rs the cause is
explained in their action. II Mr.. Davidson was not
the choice of the Convention, why did the sccedcrs
not remain at their post and confer the nomination
on some other. II the nomination was one mot fit TO
DC made IN the name of reason who are the parties
responsible for IL? Those who could have prevented
or those who desired t These are questions dcscrv-
ing consideration from those who are murmuring in
the camp
Now what docs my argument prove? That in u
Convention OF SO votes representing lG parishes,
Mr.. Davidson received % votes and six parishes
leaving 33 votes and 10 parishes not in favor Of his
nomination, and these facts well known to many
delegates in the Convention. If the Convention
when organized had been composed of delegates
representing parishes only with 20 votes then there
might be some shadow of reason for claiming the
| my Iianp n Mr. 49,
number alone first met leaving so many votes and
so many parishes unreprcscntcd they scarcely would
have had the hardihood TO proceed TO nomination
But every parish in the District was represented
and all the votes that could be drummcd up for Mr.
Davidson with MG mot c1irdorcinary cleconcerng
efforts, were but %, and with this minority il is urg
cd that he is the regular nomincc Six parishes
with % votes, debating to 10 parishes with 80 votes
Call you this Democratic? All good Democrats will
yield to the decision of majority fairly and regular
" expressed. IL by any Democratic or mathematical
principle the supporters of Mr. Davidson can cstab
fish that % votes is aJar and rgar majority of Sc
votes, then and then only will he be entitled to the
support Of the Democracy.
The fact is well known and will not be denied that
those who withdrew from the Convention were OPP
with the G votes in the Convention for Mr. Heron
make clear majority against him. yet with this
majority against him, and with the fact that he is
not the choice Of majority of The Democrats of this
District il is seriously urged that he is entitled to
the support of the Democracy! That can not be
Dcmocratic the minority ought not to rule.
"lf Mr. Davidson was not the choice of the Convcn-
ton, why did the scccders not remain at their post
and confer the nomination some other?" Pray
If he were the choice of the Convention, why did
not they give him fair and regular majority? Why
was the vote OF ST. Tammany virtually excluded?
Because Mr.. Davidson's friends were in the minority
"Who are the parties responsible for it!" Ger
tanly the Advocate docs not intend to throw the
responsibility and The odum OF that nomination OH
those ''who could have prevented til" Who rcspon-
sible? Why beyond any doubt those who did, and
not those who did not do 'thc thing" Those who
voted for Mr.. Davidson are the parties and none
Others
Must the success of our party be icopardizcd
must our party organization be sacrificed must we
endure the ignominy Of defeat, and the taunting
triumph of our political opponents must our flag
that has waved so long in triumph above our COM
pact columns, be torn down and trampled in the
dust, for candidate with only Is votes and one
whose fidelity and loyalty to our cause is something
moro than doubtful or questionable.
The heart Of every true Democrat sinks within him,
when he looks out upon our divided forces and sees
nouglt but inglorious defeat. We must not be de-
eatca, If it can be prevented; and the only way to
save us, is by calling new Convention to nominate
candidate. If we are defeated with new candi-
date, representing the choice of a majority of the
District we shall have the consolation of falling
with the right on our SIDE and be soothcd with the
reflection that did all that was possible to secure
Il fair and an honorable triumph.
A PROXY DELEGATE
TROUBLE ABOUT SWAMP LAND ENTRIES.
The annexed is from the Lake Providence Herald
Of the 2lst inst
Wn al a VII al in,n A.,