Daily national Democrat., 1858-08-21
Personal.
The following paragraph appears in the
Express, of yesterday:

| resolution submitted w MT. hohtBoHetyj q
Sutter county, the present editrr of the coali
tion organ expressed himself entirely satisfied
with that platform. and avowed his wiling
ness to stand upon it rs the correct assertion
of Democratic principles and Just recogni
tion of the popular sovereignty doctrine
After his return from the Convention he en-
dorsed that platform in the same spirit, de
claring that no Democrat no friend Of Mr.
Douglas, could refuse to endorse and main
tain its principles. be Montgomery resolu
tion then embraced nothing but the true con
struction of the Kansas Nebraska Law anC
the essence of popular sovereignty. But
cOnsenting immt diately afterwards to become
the editor of the coalition organ. it became
necessary for him to change his views of the
Montgomery resolution and of the entire
Democratic platform, ard to denounce the
whole as anti Democratic, and opposed to
popular sovereignty
By the term coalition organ" is meant n
sur upon the National Democratic organ oi
Yuba county. Well. it would be a pity to
rob these Lecomptonites of their whole stock
in trade, towit Coalition" and "Broderck. -
so let them use the terms to their hearts, con-
tent
AS to the statements in the above quoted
paragraph, if the editor makes them upon his
own responsibility, he knows well that he is
talking about matters Of which he knows
nothing. He will scarcely undertake to say,
we presume, that we ever made any such
declarations as he imputes to us, to him or in
his presence He would have rendered him.
settle liable, had he taken the precaution
! 20 say that he did not make these statements
upon his own authority. If he does not
make them upon his own authority, upon
whose does he make them ? We should like
to know the names Of those anxious reporter.
of private conversations, just for curiosity -
If they come from the proprietors of the Er
press, all we have to say is, that they take a
different view of the sacredness of business
consultations from what we do. If they come
from edUesdroppers, We should like to know
how much these eavesdroppers are paid fol
their information.
Now, all that we desire 70 say in reference
to these reputed conversations, is this W,
may have said, concerning this Montgomery
Resolution, before we had read it in print,
and before We had given the two platforms,
the Lecompton and the Democratic, that
scrutiny which they deserved and which we
intended to give, and at time when the
Resolution was explained to US, by those
anxious to win us over to their side, to mean
different thing from what it really doe,
mean, we may have said something thai
could have been distorted into an endorse
ment Of the Resolution. But so help us G cd
and that man is LIAR who denies it. wher
we read that Resolution in print and under
stood it thoroughly, and when we closely
and scrutinizingly compared the two plat
forms together, the Lecompton and til,
Democratic, we made up our mind irrevo
cably that we could not and would not sup
port the Administration side of the question
Accordingly we took our name down from
the head of the Express, and shortly after
published our valedictory.
AS to our changing our mind upon this
question, the charge, as we said before. is
wholly without foundation. There was no
necessity for us to change our mind Had
our mind been on the Lecompton side, we
could have edited the California Express as
long as we chose, and the proprietors will
not deny it. Had we consulted private and
personal pecuniary interest, We would
have remained in the Express, because, at
per, we were told by the very best of our
Douglas friends that the prospect was very
poor for establishing another paper, and that
we must not depend upon anything of the
kind-that if we left the Express. we must
do 50 with the expectation of falling to the
ground, and Of finding ourself, with our little
family upon our hands, without the means of
support We told them that come what
might, we were honestly and sincerely, and
wholly, Douglas man, and that We would
starve to death on a barren rock in the noun.
tains, before we would advocate what we did
not believe was the true doctrine We left
the Express, with the expectation of faring
hardly, as all those fare who are without
money and without employment We wrote
down to San Francisco to a newspaper
there, enquiring of the propretors, if they
had any editorial position vacant, and that as
we were without employment, we would
like very well to assist them in the editorial
management of the paper We confidently
believed that our political career was done,
and expected to have no opportunity what.
ever to express those sentiments which are
part and parcel of our political moral and
intellectual existence. But we were mistaken
We had hardly dispatched our letter inqnir
ing for situation, before the Douglas Demo.
Gratis of this city and Of the country rallied
around us, and told US, with that manly de
votion to principle which SO exalts true man
hood, that they would stand by US with arm.
and tongue and money, to the very last ex
tremity. prouder moment never flashed
upon the horizon of our life They stood
by their declarations, and here-ace are-aud
all we have to say to our political, or our
personal enemies, is come on. We feel that
we are RIGHT, and let the God of Battles
decide the issue.
VINO ARE ABoLIrIoNrsrs ?-Stephen A.
~ I