Gazette and sentinel., 1860-09-01

to an informal meeting in the morning, to en-
able the chairman to make out the report and
submit it to the committee for its approval. At
this latter meeting, when some six or eight
members of the committee opposed to the rule
were absent, not having received notice OF a
called meeting for other business and regard
ing the work as virtually finished, the rule was
again brought forward and adopted. In this
disrespectable manner was this rule brought
before and adopted by the convention.
By it the votes of the minority, in the dele
cations of Indiana, Vermont, New York and
Ohio, amounting to pa, Or 90 delegates OPP
posed to Mr.. Douglas, were thrown for him
while on the final ballot, at Baltimore, it gave
him votes in Massachusetts, 10; Pennsylva-
MIA, 10; New Jersey, q; Maryland, %
Virginia, 3: North Carolina, L; Arkansas,
II +; Missouri. AZ Tennessee, 8 and Ken
lucky, 8; in all Al, which he would not have
received had the ancient usages and rules of
the former Conventions, leaving the majority
in each State to determine how the vote Of the
State should be cast, been adhered to. Yet
the ink was hardly dry that recorded the pas
sage of the resolution, before the very men
who clamored for its adoption, sought to vio-
late it, and actually succeeded in their efforts
In the case of New Jersey, where the State
Convention recommended the delegates to vote
as a unit, the Douglas delegates overruled the
decision of the President that by the term re-
commended the Convention had Prorided the
mode for casting the vote of the State, and
allowed the two or three Douglas delegates TO
cast their individual votes.
WITHDRAWAL OF DELEGATES RON THE
CHARLESTON CONVENTION.
The record of proceedings shows this with
drawal was done IN sorrow and not in anger
not for the purposes of d~isunion, but to re-
eeive instructions from their constituents.
The friends of Mr.. Douglas at least, should
not complain. Words, however, are made
quate to express the bitterness of thier animos-
ity. Had not the Democracy of the South the
same right to State the terms upon which they
would hold fellowship with their sister States,
as Douglas had to dictate to them the platform
of their Democracy? The Southern States
gave their Interpretation of the Democratic
creed, and a portion of them insisted upon its
recognition by the Convention as the condi-
tDn of their support. They were denied this
and withdrew from the Convention. They at
least did nothing more than pursue the course
which Mr.. Douglas announced in his Dorr
letter he would pursue in the event of his
platform not being adopted for, if he could
not stand on a different platform as n candi
date, it logically followed that his position
was that of antagonism and resistance bon to
platform and candidate.
But, notwithstanding the Withdrawal OF
ffty-one delegates, no nomination vas made
at Charleston and, after a struggle OF ten
days, an adjournment was had 60 baitinlore'
under the following resolutio,:
Resolred, That when thi CONVENTION AZ
journs it adjourn to re-assehoie at baiumor56i
Monday, the 18th day o. June next, ana tHa'
it is respectfully recoDmended TO the Demo
cratic party of the several States to make pro-
vision for supplying all vacancies in their res
pectiye delegations to the Convention when 1t
shall re-assemble."
BALTIMORE CONVENTION.
The Conversion met at Baltimore. Most of
the States responded to the invitation above
recited. and their delegates presented their
credentials, ard asked admission into the Con-
~yention. How were they treated by the
friends of Mr.. Douglas!
BOGUS Observation-Disclosures.
BENJAMIN f. Hallett was regularly appointed
a delegate from Massachusetts to the National
Convention; the same Convention appointed
X. L.. Chaffee as his alternate. Owing to
sickness, Mr.. Hallett was unable to attend the
Convention at Charleston, and, in his absence,
Mr.. Chaffee, his alternate, took his place. AT
Baltimore. however, Mr.. Hallett was present,
but the Convention actually turned him out;
actually turned out the regular delegate, and
gave the seat to the alternate!
MISSOURI.
The same course was adopted il regard to
the Eighth Electoral District of Missouri.
Mr.. johnson B. Gardner the regular delegate,
was unceremoniously ousted out OF his seat,
and Mr.. O'Fallon, the contingent, voted IN.
Heretofore it has always been considered that
the alternate acted only in the absence of the
nrincinal. but this Convention gravely deter
mined that the true test foradmission into that
Convention consisted in an affirmative answer
to the question, are you for the nomination OF
! Stephen A. Douglas?
LOUISIANA AND ALABAMA.
The next step was to vote out the regular
delegation from the State of louisiana, who
were re-appointed to Baltimore by the Con-
~yention that originally appointed them, as
,lso to exclude the regular delegates from
Alabama, who were appointed by a new Con-
,ention called by the Democratic Committee
6 the State. The history of the cases is this.
After the secession at Charleston, the Demo
catic Central Committee of Louisiana, the
OILY association in that State having the power
to assemble the Democracy in Convention
called together the State Convention, repre-
setting every county in the State, and that
Convention re-appointed the same delegates t.
Baltimore. A few irresponsible men called
another Convention, at which the Democracy
of the State were pot represented. In the cas-
/ of Alabama, the Democratic Central Commit
tee called a new Convention, to be elected b,
: the Democracy of the several counties. Til
, Convention met, and sent back the .reguia
| delegates to Baltimore. A number OF persons
however, issued a call, published in only tire