New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1858-05-17

In the year 1854, the Hon. Jared " Peck repre-
scented the Westchester District (ne1t above this
City, in Congress, having been elected BY large
majority as Democrat, at the same time with
Franklin Pierce as President. Mr.. Peck was
young man, not hardened politician, and, when
the Nebraska bill came before the House, he was
very naturally perplexed as to bis true course
Party allegiance and party favor pulled one way;
public sentiment and bis own impressions as to
what was just and e1pedient drew in the opposite
direction. After taking time for inquiry and de-
liberation, Mr.. Peck decided to oppose the bill,
and he did so to the end.
In the Autumn following his successor was to be
chosen. A very strong public sentiment in the
District demanded his reelection. One man had
power to defeat this sentiment-Mr. Peck himself.
He refused to be a candidate, saying that he had
pledged himself to do so when he was first nomi-
mated, and would respect that pledge throughout.
So DR.. Brandreth obtained the Democratic, and
Mr. Bayard Clark the Wing and "American"
nominations, and, having taken strong ground in q
letter and in his speeches, against the Nebraska
policy, Mr.. c. was overwhelmingly elected.
There were citizens Of the District who were not
satisfied thus to drop Mr. Peck The writer hereoffor
one wrote on bis ballot the name OF Jared V. Peck
for Congress, and so voted it; and, had there been
printed ballols for Mr.. Peck at the several polls,
the vote for him would have been large one. But
Mr.. Peck had declined-he was not in nomination
every vote for him was notoriously vote thrown
away 90 far as the immediate result was concerned
so but few were cast Hereupon Mr.. Elijah
Ward, NJ. C. from this City, makes Lecompton
speech denunciatory of the course of the Hon. John
B. Haskn, wherein he says:
"My colleague will bear in mind that his predeces-
sor in 1854, voted against the kansas'NeDraska bull
in oppositon TO the wishes Of his constituents. he
boosted that he could be returned upon that vote not
beirg nominated, he ran, in 1885, as an independent
candidate, and received so small a number OF votes
that i DO not find his name mentioned in the official
canvass"
False as this statement is in every essential par
ticular, it yet conveys an admonition to the poll
tcians of the Westchester District which they
would do well to heed. We ask those gentlemen
to bear in mind that there are good many voters
in the District who will not see Mr.. Haskn
shelyed as Mr.. Peck was, even though he should
desire it. This one, for instance, will not be con-
tent with merely writing and voting EIaskin bal
lott he will endeavOr to see that there shall be
printed ballots at every poll, and men to circulate
them. OF the voters of the District, an immense
majority approve the course of Mr.. Haskin and
have determined to realect him. If the LecOmp-
tonites see fit to run candidate against him. there
can be no objection; but if any candidate
other than Mr.. Haskin is brought out who
is professedly anti-Lecompton, no matter under
what guise or in the name of what party, he
will be regarded and treated as wolf in sleeps
clothing. If there should happen to be any Elijah
Wards in the next Congress, they shall not have
opportunity to exult over NJ. Haskin with even
the shadow Of pausbility which relieves the gen.
eral untruth of the above allusion to Mr.. Peck.