American union. [volume] (Morgantown, Va. [W. Va.]) 1855-1859, 1858-12-17

Do"slos so'u heIe were some gentle
men IN Inc convention who intended il they
allied to defeat the will OF the neople. and
'ohh Lelcher was nominated, to reserve to |
themselves the right to vote for him or not. |
a member from Roanoke deprecated the
assertion that Mr.. Le,cher was The choice OF |
inc people, and asserted that Hon. III. A. |
was very clever man.
Mr.. Roger said he would NOT press The
mo',on, and would withdrawit. Applause.
MIR; Barbour, Of Culpepper moved to 60
INTO the nomination. Adopted.
Mr.: Is. then put in nomination for Cover.
nor, hon. John betcher, of Rockbridge-a
son OF the Tenth Legion. He desired only
10 take the question whether the merits of
MI Le,cher entitled him 10 the confidence
Of Inc democracy. a voice, MOL
Mr.. J. Fillippo, OF Caroline. In 1917 he
was Wing and Ruffner pamphlet man.
tie Is In Congress; let him stay there, where
ne can tight abo lition'sts if he wants. lam
in favor Of Edmundson. 1v
Mr.. Cook. Of Wy,he, came to be heard for
a greater than the Tenth Legion.
Mr.. Cook proceeded TO claim for "Little
4 ennessee" some consideration Of The Dem
ocracy. He stood here in The name of South
western virginia, 10 accept any man but
John Letcher, and 10 protest against him.
he came here Tor nothing else blu, to oppose
John Le'cher; though he should vote for him
II nominated. He thought that, on his own
merits, John Lelche could not carry con-
stables district from the Alleshenies TO the
Cumberland Gap. He stood before the De.
mocracy the only man named for the Gov,
ernorshlP who was Objectionable. IL il was
his misfortune, he did not sympathise. He
thought Letcher was more Objectionable all
over Western Virginia, & especially South
Western Virginia, than he was in the East
elm part of the State. He asked, what had
any man to say against Henry A. Edmund
son, or old Gray George w. Hopkins,
Ben, Rush Floyd; (all these names especial
~ The first, were cheered;) and, (pointing
to General Chapman, of Monroe, on the
PLATFORM said, there was a man that could
beat John Letcher five to one. He mention
ed the name OF Judge peterborough, which
was received with cheers. He had received,
at the time of its publication, copy of the
Rutlner pamphlet, ard had marked on i,
-"Fool-liaI-lalseho treason; and cent
It back to the author. These words express
ed the sentiments of his constituents. He
would express no preference between any of
the candidates who were named, beside
John Letcher.
MIR. Flourney. OF Halifax, said that the
slayeho,lding portion of Virginia was in favor
Of Letcher Mr.. l.. had endorsed the Ruffner
lecture, but not the pamphlet. ..... 50
MIR. Flourney proceeded 10 ask if The sin
OF the Rutiner pamphlet was never to be for
given or forgotten A voice---"Never."l
Anoiher Uoiee-'Why wasn't Mr.. Sum.
mers forgiven ?"
Mr.. Harrison, Of Monroe, wished to enter
the protest of his county against tn g nomina.
ton OF Mr.. Lee cher, the most objectiona BILE
man TO the patty. He attacked Mr.. Letcher
on the RuffIer pamphlet and read extracts
from 1t. He said that after the endorsa,ion
OF these extracts on slavery. he would not
be willing TO trust MIR. Letcher as Governor
OF Virginia. He was not fiji for Governor of
this State as long as there was slave i'm it.
Timothy Riyes, Esq, Of Prince George,
was loudly called for Tho "war horse
mounted the rosirum by request and opened
his batteries against John Letcher. THIS
speech we cannot pretend to report with
iaithlulness. He reviewed the history of
the Objectionable nominee alb inhio the
kuiiner speech was thoroughly discussed,
and every iota Of the Letcher record torn up
and held i'll glazing colors before the Con.
venllon. tie drew comparison between
The record OF Lelcher and Geo. w. Sum-
mers the Wing candidate for Governor, in
1852. The latter, in 1892, had express sed
sentiments advocating the emancipating Of
slavery in Virginia, and the former had done
The same in lS47, adding that "he believed
slavery to be social and political evil."-
In the discuss ion Of this question: he in v olyed
Roger a Pryor, Esq, then of the South Side
democrat, as battling against Summers on
ms very question, and now taking up the
glove OF tie opponents of Lelcher. The
merits Of the speech of MIR. Rves could not
be fully appreciated unless the speech and
the men were seen and heard together. The
force expression emphasis and gesture gave q
distinguished touch TO all that he said, not
10 be ever conveyed by words. 1t is suf.
Ecient to say, that il ever a man was rowed
up Salt River on The strength of "record ;"
john Letcher, Of Rockbridge, certainly was
his "record' was absolutely ripped into
flnters, After speaking for two hours, he
at length gave way TO a motion 10 adjourn,
which, after much opposition, was carried,
aud he promised to resume his remarks al
half past 5 p. Nj. F.. .s' ......
afternoon Session. ...r
Mr.. Rives continued his swc epinp phillip.
pic against Letcher,, and closed in all hour.
Mr.. Pryor rose to reply. He spoke of the
political position of Mr.. Rives. he being
famous for opposing prominent Democratic
gentlemen. He had opposed Gov. Wise in
lS4S. MIR. Pryor then went into compari.
son Of the course of Messrs Summers and
Letcher,and contended that the former never
recanted his anti.slavery u,terances, bat, on
the contrary, carried them iuto effect in
after action.
A yoice-Mr. Pryor, heard Mr.. George
ii. Summers recant those assertions.
Mr.. Pryor-I deny that.
After having spoken two hours, Mr.. Pryor
became exhausted and was compelled TO
retire, when the convention adjourned until
half past seven o'clock.
,. Night Session. g.nE.
A motion was made to GO into the cleo.