The Nevada Democrat., 1858-11-24
m. EI.c1ions An 1854 ana 1858.

the defeats which have taken place this year,
and argue therefrOm, that the party must again
be successful in 1860, as It was In 1866. The
passage of the Kansas Nebraska bill, for which
the Democracy became mainly responsible, Is
assumed to be the cause of the downfall OF the
party four years ago, and it Is not denied that
the action of the administration 10 endeavoring
to force an obnoxious Constitution upon the
people Of Kansas, was the sole cause OF the dis
asters to the party this year.
Were it necessary, we believe 1t could be
shown that the novelty Of Know Nothngism,
was more potent lever in the hands OF the OPP
ponents of Democracy in 1854 than the repeal
of the Missouri Compromise The Republicans
were not then organized, and the Know Nothlngs
did not, during that year at least make any Is
sue with the Democrats in regard to the Kansas
Nebraska bilI this they would scarcely failed to
have done. had that measure been 30 very un-
popular in the North.
But even admitting that the Democracy were
defeated in 1854, in consequence of the prlnci-
pie which the party had inaugurated as set
Element of the slavery question, there is little
similarity between the causes which resulted
in the defeat of the party that year and this.
Then, the masses of the party resolutely ad-
hered to the Kansas Nebraska bill. contended
that i. was equitable and just, and were willing
TO stand or fall by the principle. The defeat
this year was occasioned solely by the fact, that
the administration which the Democracy had
placed in power, attempted to nullify leading
principle of the party creed and notwithstand-
ing the masses of the Democracy repudiated
this attempt, yet the party in many cases was
held responsible for the acts Of the administra-
ton In the Northwestern States in particular,
the party in body, has repudiated the Kansas
policy of the administration, and o reference to
o few leading facts, will show how deep was
the feeling in those States against Lecompton-
ism. In Ohio. Notwithstanding large majori-
ty of the delegates to the State Convention were
anti -Lecompton, they were induced, for fear of
losing the votes ofa few offlce-holders, to pass
over without notice. the trea cherry of the ad-
ministration, although their nominees were all
friends of Douglas. This temporIsng policy
occasioned q loss of from 10000 to $4,000 votes
to the party. as compared with the vote Of last
year. In Indiana, the State Convention de-
clared for Popular Sovereignty, while the Le-
comptonites got control of q number Of the
Congressional Conventions, and nominated for
reelection, some of the present members. The
result showed a loss on the Congressional tick
ct of over Is, 900 votes as compared with the
State ticket, the candidates on the latter being
elected by q majority of from two to three thou
sand votes 1t is within bounds to say that
three e-fourths of the Democrats of both of these
States, are friends of Douglas, and regard his
construction of the Kansas Nebraska bill AS the
true Democratic doctrine. Tn 1854, many vo-
ted the Democratic ticket, in preference to the
Know Nothing, who disapproved of the Kansas
Nebraska bill, but the most of these went over
to the Republicans, on the organization Of that
party.
It is folly to speculate upon the probable re-
suit of the next Presidential contest The course
of events between now and the time appointed
for the assembling of the Charleston Conven-
tion, will have so much to do with determining
that contest, that the most far-seeing political
calculator, cannot with any degree Of certain
ty, predict the result. Every year brings forth
new issues and new combinations, and the
events of the two years succeeding the fall OF
1854, are no criterion by which to judge of what
may happen for the two years to come.