Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1859-09-10
THE ELECTION IN THIS COUNTY

THE ELECTION IN THIS COUNTY,
The regularly nominated Republican ticket
for Senators and county officers in this county
is elected, with a single exception, by largely
increased majority. JOHN c. RICHARDSON, one
of the senatorial candidates is defeated, and
that too by Republican votes, but as his place
is supplied by WIN. HARRIS, Jr a staunch Re-
publican, the political complexion of the ticket
is not thereby affected. Twent,-one of the
twenty-three towns will be represented by Re-
publicans in one town there is, as usual, no
UnViUvj tvwu that glNvs Ma ~
majority, sends moderate democrat merely for
the fun of the thing we suppose. From these
data and the figures given elsewhere it may be
with reason inferred that in its political charac-
ter Windham county is essentially Republican
Even the stump efforts of the genial, witty and
poetical SANE have failed to produce any other
result than to increase the Republican vote to
over 400 more than that of last year, and di-
mnish the democratic total by loss of 60 or
more votes We trust that his labors will be
thus signally blessed in the future.
The election of Mr. HARRIS and the defeat of
Mr. RICHARDSON, calls for passing notice, for
it is result based upon principle that will be
found difficult to justify upon :he ordinary and
recognised rules of political procedure Mr.
RICHARDSON was fairly nominated in caucus
duly called for that purpose; we say fairly, for
no protest was made in convention, or has been
since, of any unfairness then or there The
credentials of all members were reported upon
by proper committee, and that report was un-
animously accepted.
Now caucuses have some authority or they
have not They have been accepted by all par
ties as proper and appropriate means to give
expression to the popular preference of the par
ty. 1t is undeniable that they have sometimes
failed to do this, but the remedy has usually
been applied by greater attendance and more
careful dcliberaton thereafter. The boiling of
regular nominations and the dissemination and
support of "split tickets has been and is gen
orally frowned upon by all parties, thus giving
weight to the position that caucus nominations
have some binding force in honor and conscience.
1t has generally been held, we believe, as sound
doctrine that if man participates in q caucus,
and there is no complaint of unfairness in the
manner of giving expression to the wishes of
n majority of that caucus, he is so far bound in
honor as not to encourage an organized oppo-
stion to the caucus candidate. If he cannot in
conscience vote for the man nominated, he can
not in honor aid in the election of another
against him, except for reason of delinquency
or unftness which, if known to the caucus
how l,,1a c.
must be the inevitable conclusion of every fair
and honorable mind if a caucus nomination has
any force or is entitled to any consideration.
If caucus has no force and caucus nom-
nation has no moral or honorary obligation, the
whole matter of conventions may as well be
dispensed with at once, and the people be LETT,
as they now are in the election of town repre-
sentatives in many towns, to make their own
selection at the polls. But so long as the eau
Gus system obtains we cannot for the life of us
see how man who has an official connection
with party organization, either as a commit
tee-man or a candidate, can depend upon the
fact of his appointment or nomination for the
support of his political friends, and then encour-
age opposition TO another candidate put in nom
ina,ion by the same caucus and by precisely the
same authority that he is thus placed Such
proceeding is to our mind irreconcilable with
honor or common decency. Others may view
it in more favorable light
The circumstances of the case that has lust
happened in this county, and which has called
ont these remarks, are in some respects novel,
1t is eontended not that there was anything I'M
fair in the caucus, but that in the primary meet
ings of some of the towns influences so mani
testify unfair were brought into operation that
Mr. HARRIS was deprived of denomination
that would otherwise have been accorded to
him. 1t is further contended that usage re-
quires that man should have two nominations
for the same Office, unless some valid objection
can be made either personally or politically
against him; and consequently that as Mr.
HARRIS had had but one election and no suffi |
cient charge appearing against him, he was fair
ly entitled to not only a denomination but to a
reelection. On this conviction his friends act
ed, and with such success that the result will
undoubtedly justify the act in their own sight |
Nearly all of those who voted for Mr. HARRIS
have no sort of objection to the candidate who
was defeated, but on the other hand they ex-
press the confident hope that another year they
shall have an opportunity of testfyng their re-
gard for him by promoting his election as SEN
ator.
In conclusion we must say that we regard the
action of the Republican party on Tuesday in
this matter, as utterly indefensbe on any prin-
ciple consistent with anything like party author
ity or party organization. Personally we have
no complaint to make. Both of the candidates
are our friends, and we wish them in an equal