Weekly North Carolina standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1850-1858, 1858-03-03
Mr.. McRae.

Z Mr.. McRae is now engaged, and has been en-
gagged for several weeks past. in enlightening the
people of North-Carolina the subject of distri-
button" He has spoken at various points this
question, and intends, we presume to continue to
speak, applauded by Know Nothings and condemned
and denounced by the party with which he was
formerly identified We learn that he devotes much
Of his time to humble SELF and that the applause
he receives from the opposition, which he is faith
fully serving is in exact proportion to the point and
vehemencc with which he assails the Standard.
We should be wanting in courtesy if we did not re-
cprocate the attention thus bestowed upon us; and
we SHALL therefore, pay our respects to the gentle
man at some length, and in such way may af-
ford, perhaps, faint requital for the "distin.
euished consideration" we are receiving at his
hands.
The facts in Mr.. McRaes political career drive ir-
resstably to the conclusion first that he not very
deeply concerned on the subject of distribution and
the public lands; and secondly that he is the victim
Of disappointed ambition.
What are the facts? In the Spring Of 1852 Con-
venton of the Democratic party of the State was
held to nominate candidate for Governor Mr..
McRae was member, and was made President of
the Convention In his speech acknowledging the
honor conferred upon him there was no allusion to
distribution but the contrary, he referred in exult
ing terms to the old landmarks of the party and de-
clared himself willing and ready to be guided by
them. All former Conventions, State and National.
had discarded and denounced distribution, some of
them as inexpedient, and some of them as both in
expedent and unconstitutional Mr.. McRae knew
this when he accepted the honor referred to-he
tba tbo for hut inst
distribution. yet he left his seat and made Speech
in which, as he asserts, he took the ground that in
view of the settled policy of donations, and the I'M
possibility of maintaining the old Democratic doc
trine, it was altogether right that fair distribution
of this common property should be had among all
the States" He also declares that that Democrat
ic Convention in that rejected the resolution
on the subject reported by the Committee" and re-
solved substantially as above. This is his recollec.
ton of what took pace. If correct, how did it hap
pen that the Convention did not carry out the reso-
luton of the caucus? No such resolution appears
in the proceedings Of that body but on the contrary
aresolution very similar in language and substance
to those adopted on the subject by former Conven-
tons. Now, if Mr. A:cRae declared on the occasion
referred to that it was impossi6le to maintain the
old doctrine on the subject and that in view of this
it was fright that fair distribution Of this common
property should be had among all the States, is it
not clear that he made distribution speech? And
who believes that if he had announced such senti'
ments before the Convention organized be would
have been chosen its President?
We raise no Issue of vcracity with the gentleman.
We think, in the first place. that his recollection is
at fault in the matter and secondly, that he overes.
tmates and overstates what really took place. The
incident certainly produced marked effect upon
the Convention; and the gentleman was not consid
cred thereafter, so far as understood, distribn
tonist He regarded as having protested in
common with the entire party, against the squan.
derng of the lands on unworthy and improper OBJ
jects; but this was no new thing in this other
States holding in good faith to the old doctrine that
the lands ought to be retained by the federal gov
ernment and the proceeds of their sales r!gdly ap
Piled to the objects specified in the Constitution
But Notwithstanding this, Mr.. McRae as We learn as
sers that he was afterwards endorsed orthodox
democrat by being recommended by the Democratic
members of the Legislature of 1852 and by othel
Democrats, the Senior Editor of this paper included
10 President Pierce, for a foreign mission We have
no very distinct recollection of the matter, but w
presume this endorsement was made during the ses
Sion Of the Legislature, in 1852. We presume alst
mat it was not volunteered, but was sought. Mr.
AcRae, we believe, had fixed his eye on the mission
10 Chill, and in this he was disappointed. He faec
10 get Chill, but rendered the Consulshp at St
lhomas, in the West Indies, sickly and rather in
significant place. Mr.. Pierce, it seems, did not es
innate the gentleman as highly as he Gid himself, o.
as highly as did those Of his friends who had en-
o0fsed him, as he insists, as IN orthodox" Demo