East Saginaw courier. (East Saginaw, Mich.) 1859-18??, 1860-08-02

; published in the district, and others on
, Of il having circulation there, which wal
/ numerously attended, and which, witt
unusual unanimity, appointed four gen
tlemen of character and distinction e
represent that district in the Baltimor,
convention. Three of them attended
/ and were permitted by the committee OF
credentials to cast one vote.
The second Congressional district hsv
ing called no meeting, the same commit
tee permitted the delegates appointed by
the Congressional convention, together
: with the seceders and appointees Of the
first Congressional convention, to cast
two votes, leaving one vote to be cast by
Messrs. Flourney and Stirman, whos'
right to cast it was contested by nosher
party, they having never secede@ MI
Stirman, however, declined to vote aIter
the secession of the majority OF the VIZ
ginia and other southern delegations,
which left but one and a half votes cast
by Arkansas for Douglas. IL must DC
conceded that the repo'd Oh tne commit
tee upon credentialc was SO hoerai and
conciliatorv tovards the seceders and
their friends as to be hardly just to be
renresont,.ives of the national democra-
cy fro, this State.
GEORGIA.
In this State, after the Charleston
secession, a regular State convention was
called at Milledgeville, and all the dele
gates, as well those who had seeded
as those who had not, were re-appoin ed
as delegates from Georgia to the demo-
cratic national convention at Baltimore,
and also appointed as delegates to the
convention protested against the act ac-
crediting delegates to Richmond, declar-
ing that an act of hostility toward the
national organization of the democratic
party, and refusing to engage in any
such scheme. This minority withdrew
from the convention, and, uniting with
the representatives of several counties
who had refused to participate in it, or
ganized a separate convention, and APP
pointed full delegation accredited to
Baltimore only.
The national convention at Baltimore,
with extravaganza Of liberalty rather
than sense of justice, excluded the dele
CATION thus accredited to itself alone,
and admitted the delegation accredited
as well to Richmond.
ACTION AT BALTIMORE.
Tt appears, from what we have said
that all the delegates to the Richmond
convention, except from the four States
of South Carolina, Florila Louisiana and
Alabama, were actually admitted, as
delegates, in the national convention at
Baltimore; that convention sacrificing its
usages of the democratic party, and even
las we think its proper self-respect, for
the sake of reunion, harmony and ulti-
mate success.
South Carolina and Florida did not
apply for admission; and, therefore, it
cannot be said that any injustice was in
Aicted upon them.
In the cases of Louisiana and Alabama
the new delegation were admitted, and
those who represented the Charleston
seceders were rejected. The decision OF
these two cases, therefore, must constitute
the sole pretext for the secession at Bal
timore.
We have related the facts Of each case,
as understood by the majority of the
committee on credentials, and by the
majority of the convention; and, although
confident in our opinion that the conven
ton erred in admitting a single delegate
accredited to the rival convention al
Richmond, we, nevertheless, submit tc
you, felow-citizens, whether q decision
between two delegations from Louisiana
and Alabama (even treating the decision
erroneous) constituted any sufficient ex
, cuse to those delegates from Virginia
Maryland, North Carolina, Kentucky
Tennessee, Oregon, California and othel
States who seeded, thereupon, at Balti
more. Was it not a pretext industrious
: ly sought, and at the instigation of mer
: Cabinet officers, Senators and Repre-
, sentatives in Congress, placemen or con
} tractors of Mr.. Buchanan's choice-t,
whom the democracy of their own State
, had not confded the duty of selecting on
' candidates for President or Vice Presi
c dent? We can give to this whole afiai
c no other Interpretation; and we denounc
9 such meddlesomeness, therefore, as al
atteiilpI W uoui Il thc O'heioi Va thO UShio
A cratic party, and even to dictate its nomi
e nees, by those to whom the people neve
' entrusted by any such task. That an.
: delegate should have been so far deceive
as to become an instrument of this con
spiracy against popular rights, agains
4 democratic principles and policy an
r usages, we do exceedingly regret; but tn
G whole case is now before you, and it
d for the wisdom and virtue Of the peopl
!, in every State to redress an outrage S
y unparalleled.
!, SECESSION AT BALTIMORE.
: The sole pretext for this, we repeat
!, was the admission of certain delegate
n from Louisiana and Alabama, and tn
Z rejection of their adverse claimants
c The convention had decided similar con
t troversies at Charleston with regard
g the States of New York and Illinois, bu
!, no secession or even disturbance ensuet
d In the case of New York, the Louisian
: delegation voted unanimously upon OIL
2, side, and the Alabama delegation unan
s mously upon the other. What if the
y had then parted company?
c 1t is too ridiculous-or, rather, woul