Staunton vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1860-1896, 1860-05-11
Unit Vote Of Virginia.

that the delegates to the Charleston Con
vention from this district-Dr. s. Fl. Mof
felt and the editor If the Vipdicator--de.
parted from the ordinary usage Of the party
on such occasions, and broke what is called
the unit vote of the State. VS. were in
favor of the vote being cast as a unit, as an
original question, because we desired to
retain the influence Virginia had ever exer.
ted in National Conventions But the vas
rcllating, trimming and childish course pur-
sued by the self-constituted leaders of the
majority of the delegation-uow playing
/. the sycophant and political huckster to the
New York delegation, and now being led
by the nose by the disunionists of Alabama
afraid to boldly assert and fearlessly main
tain decisive and defensible policy-crea-
ted a feeling of such supreme disgust and
contempt with all independent, free thinking
men, as to lose. the prestige the State en-
joyed, and rather to excite smile of deris-
i've pity. than an impulse Of admiration.
The friends of Mr.. Hunter in Virginia
succeeded in selecting majority of the del
CATION, who favored the re-enactment Of the
Cincinnati Platform against the proposition
of the friends Of Gov. Wise for Congress
sional Intervention in the Territories. This
majority assumed that position at their first
meeting in Charleston. But this did not
suit the disunionists Of the cotton States,
they declaring that they would not support
Mr.. Hunter unless the intervention doc
trine was endorsed by Virginia. Forth
with, then, resolution was introduced into
the delegation by one of the over ardent
friends of Mr.. Hunter, favoring the idea Of
Congressional interference This was pre-
cisely what the friends of Wise wanted, and
therefore they voted for it, thus committing
the peculiar friends Of Hunter to the very
policy which they opposed in the District
Conventions that appointed them. The
committee on resolutions reported a major
ity platform embracing the doctrine Of the
Virginia delegation resolution, and a minor
ity platform consisting mainly Of the Cincin-
natl Platform. The Convention repudiated
the majority report, whereupon several ofthe
Southern States retired, carrying with them
the doctrine declared by majority Of the
Virginia delegation, but Virginia remained
behind Mr.. Hunters strength was thus
materially weakened in the South. Hence,
his friends, par excellence, had to look a.
round for help from some other source. So
they wheeled about, and in the face Of their
vote but a few moments before endorsing
the position of Gov. Wises friends, planted
themselves upon the Cincinnati platform,
thus returning to their original position,
(which the delegates from this district had
never forsaken,) after having boxed the po-
litical compass in search of "more votes. .
Here, then, was sufficient grounds for both
the North and the South to forsake Hunter,
his peculiar friends having coquetted most
fatally with either section: It was very
plain to the most superficial observer, even
at this stage of the proceedings, that the
nomination of Mr. Hunter was an iinposs-
Utility, and that his name should not be
placed before the Convention. But pursu-
ing the same blind and ill-advised policy
that had marked the action of his peculiar
friends up to this time, he was brought for
ward, with determination, on the part of
some of the delegation, to vote for him until
the "crack of DOOM or Of the Convention
itself N OF wishing to act hastily in SO i'm
portant and responsible a step, the delegates
from this district continued to vote for Mr..
Hunter for % ballots, he falling off and his
chances becoming more desperate each bal
lot. About this time Judge Douglas had
received majority of the whole electoral
vote, bit before the vote was nnounced,
one of the delegates from Minnesota changed
his vote from Douglas. We requested the
Chairman of the Virginia delegation to with
draw the name Of Mr.. Hunter This h G
refused to do, without assigning any sufi
Gent reason. Thereupons having become
weafied with playing at such farce, and
disguised at the mutilation Of Mr.. Hunter
by his professed friends, the delegates from
this District cast their votes for MFR. Doug
las, who was clearly the choice of major
ity of the Convention. 1ga
This is the reason why the vote Of Vir-
GINA was split We appeal to the Democ-
racy of the Tenth Legion District to say
whether or not we did right whether their
wishes were not fairly and frankly repre-
sented? That Mr. Hunters chances were
entirely hopeless, was apparent to all who
desired to learn the truth aud benefit by it.
His Southern strength, mainly, had long
before left the Convention. and at the North
he had Done of any consequence. Retain
ing his name before the Convention, under
such circumstances, was deliberate folly,
/ ooJ a,,lotad +c croatia onauias and, defeat FIJI