The weekly pioneer and Democrat., 1860-08-24
THE WEEKLY PIONEER AND DEMOCRAT.

on it in 1856; AND, so HELP ME GoD, I
INTEND TO STAND BY IT, NO NATTER WHO
DESERTS IT p
"REMINISCENCES FOR THE BRECKITEs.
The Breckenridge bolt and detection from
the Democratic party in 1860 has most
remarkable parallel in the Hugh L. White
treachery to the Democracy in 1886. Judge
Hugh L. White, of Tennessee, was one of
the most popular and eminent Democratic
leaders of the jackson era. He had many
friends, who earnestly desired that he should
be the successor of General jackson in the
Presidential Chair. The sentiment of the
party was, however, strongly in favor of the
selection of Mr.. Van Buren, and he was,
accordingly nominated in the National
Convention, which met in May, 1885, at the
city of Baltimore. Judge White and his
friends refused to submit to the decision of
this Convention on divers pretexts, among
others that the Convention allowed the
wrong person, as they thought, to cast the
vote of Tennessee in that body. This is
like one of the reasons set up by the Breck-
inridge boilers now-that the wrong dele.
cations were admitted from Alabama and
Louisiana at the late Baltimore Convention.
Judge White was nominated and brought
forward under the auspices of the Alabama
Legislature, whose politicians refused to
fraternize with the National Democracy,
just as their Yancey successors did in 1860.
The design of the friends of White was
to throw the election into the House of Rep
resentatives, where they thought White
would be chosen. They had no hope of
electing him by the people, and in the free
States did not even run an Electoral ticket.
This is practically the position of the Breck-
inridge men. Judge Whites friends tried
to convince the people that he was the reg
ular Democratic candidate, just as their
Breckenridge successors are doing now.
They claimed that he was the choice of the
Democratic Southern States, while only the
Opposition States of the North favored Mr..
Van Buren. In this they have been imita-
ted by their Breckenridge successors. There
were four candidates in the field then, just
as there are at present Martin Van Buren,
VIM. H. Harrison, Hugh L. White, and
Daniel Webster. In one remarkable instance
the White rebellion differs from that of the
Breckenridge. The latter has the support
of the existing Administration-that of
James Buchanan, who treacherously aban-
doned the party that elected him. The for
mer did not have the support of then Presi-
dent-glorious Andrew jackson, who would
sooner have cut off his right hand that been
guilty of such an act of bad faith to his
friends. The result of the Judge White
rebellion was that it miserably failed to de-
feat Mr.. Van Buren's election by the people.
He only carried two Southern States, Geor-
gia and Tennessee, the remainder of them
either going for Mr.. Van Buren or General
Harrison. Judge White and his leading
friends were put outside of the Democratic
organization, where they have remained to
this day. So it will be with Mr.. Breckin>
ridge and his supporters in 1860. They
will not defeat Mr.. Douglass election by the
people, but will simply dig their own polit-
ical graves.-Cincinnatti Enquirer.
At the Presidential election of '36 there
were, as now, five candidates in the field, and
then, as will be the case in November, the
regular Democratic nominee was trium.
phantly elected. Each candidate received
I'M