Bradford reporter. [volume] (Towanda, Pa.) 1844-1884, 1857-08-13
Gen, Packers DecIination.
REPLY OF THE CHAIRMAN OF THE ATE COMMITTEE.
PHILADELPHIA, July25th, 1851.

REPLY OF THE CHAIRMAN OF THE ST ATE COMMITTEE.
PHILADELPHIA, July25th, 1851.
Hon WV f. PACKER:
Dear Sir II have laid before the State
Committee the letter signed ID. Wimot, dated
the l4th instant, and am authorized to say to
YOU that in the opinion of the Committee You
ought not to accede to the proposition it con-
tans. The reasons for this opinion will pro-
ceed briefly TO state:
The slavery question, wliichis probableyour
opponent proposes to discuss, has very recent
ly been thoroughly considered and passed upon
by the people Of the Commonwealth. The
late Presidential canvass involved the whole
subject so far as it was proper for considera=
tion by our people, and we can perceive no
utility in its rediscuSsion at this time nor
any other good reason for re-opening debate
upon it, The position Of our party is wei I'M
derstood and requires no vindication, at least
by any extraordinary proceeding like that pro-
posed. @
A Joint canvass by candidates for the Gub-
ernatorial Office has never been conducted in
this State, nor, believe, in any other North
ern one and may well be questioned on grounds
of public policy. If the practice be once adop-
ted it will doubtless continue, and party nom
nations be uniformly made with reference to
it. No party will venture to select a candidate
for this Office who is not qualified for the stump
and aptitude for debate will hence come to be
preferred to administrative ability. In Short,t he
result will be to confine nominations to the
class of takers and to exclude all others. A
rule of party action which would prevent such
men as Benjamin Franklin, Simon Snyder and
Francis r. Skunk from filling the Executive
chair of this State, must be a bad one, and to
be denounced rather that adopted.
We believe there is a considerable public
opinion against the propridty OF the Executive
Candidates appearing at all before popular
meetings to solicit votes. This was first prac-
ticed by VIM f. johnson, in lS4S, and has
been to some extent followed by candidates
since The good results of it are not obvious.
1t did not originate with the Democratic party
nor has it ever received any formal popular or
party sanction 1t may therefore be consider d
an open question in future practice, and at all
events, as forming no part of the duty of a
candidate imposed upon him by his nomination.
While your opponent holds the Office of
President Judge, there is special objection
to the acceptance of his project The propri-
ETY. of law judges taking part in political meet
ing is denied by our party and is opposed by
sound public opinion. BY no act whatever
ought we to sanction, or become participants
in prostitution of the judicial character. Nor
will a resignation now made altogether re-
move this objection. Your opponent has inten-
tionaly held his Office until within 3 months of
the election, (rendering it impossible to elect a
successor the present year, and if reSigna-
tion should not take place, it would obviously
be with the intention of resuming the Office af-
ter defeat for the post to which he aspired.
The proposed mode of conducting campaigns
may possibly be suited to some of the South
ern and Southwestern States, where ithas been
practiced, and where population and political
conditions differ from ours !; but its introduc-
ton here would be against solid objections, and
without any conceivable good Itis therefore,
proposed " Southern aggression" upon the
practices and politics of parties in Pennsyl-
rania, which cannot be at all accepted or per
mittcd.
1t is well that the question has arisen when
we have candidate capable and fit for any
discussion before the people, and when the de-
cison can be placed, without embarrassment,
upon public grounds which control it.
am, very respectfully, your obedient servant
c. r. BUCKALEW, Chairman.