Gazette and sentinel., 1860-09-01

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 rs 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 2T4, or 50 delegates OPP
posed to Mr.. Douglas, were thrown for him
while on the final ballot, at Baltimore, 1t gave
him votes in Massachusetts, 10; Pennsy!ya-
MIA, 10; New Jersey, % Maryland, -
Virginia, 3: North Carolina, /; Arkansas,
IL; Missouri, Al Tennessee, and Ken
lucky, 3 /; 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. let
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 Prortfed the
mode for casting the vote of the State, and
allowed the two or three Douglas delegates 70
cast their individual votes.
WITHDRAWAL OF FROM II
CHARLESTON CONVENTION.
The record of proceedings shows this with
drawal was done IN sorrow and not IN anger;
not for the purposes of disunion, but TO re-
oo,-o ....;o,. f-,p, chair 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-
ton 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 a csndi-
date, it logically followed that his position
was that of antagonism and resistance both to
platform and candidate.
But, Notwithstanding the withdrawal of
ffty-one delegates, no nomination was made
at Charleston and, after a struggle of ten
DAYS, an adjournment was had TO Baltimore,
under the following resolution
Resoired, That when this Convention ad-
iourns it adjourn tore-assemble at Baltimore on
Monday, the 18th day of June next, and that
it is respectfully recommended TO the Demo-
cratic party of the several States to make pro-
vision for supplying all vacancies in their res
pective delegations to the Convention when it
shall re-assemble."
BALTIMORE CONVENTION
The Convention met at Baltimore. Most Of
the States responded to the invitation above
recited, and their delegates presented their
credentials, and asked admission into the Com
~vention. How were they treated by the
friends Of Mr.. Douglas?
Ta. BOGUS OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES.
Benjamin F. Hallett was regularly appointed
a delegate from Massachusetts to the National
| Convention the same Convention appointed
X. l.. Chafiee 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 detegnte, and
gave the seat to the alternate!
! eHj ".,n 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.. 0'Fallon, the contingent, voted in.
Heretoforeit has always been considered that
the alternate acted only in the absence of the
principal, but this Convention gravely deter
mined that the true test for admission into that
| Convention consisted in an affirmative answer
to the question, are you for the nomination of
Stephen A. Douglas. ItiJ t.f z. ~
p LOUISIANA AND ALABAMA. i- W.
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, az
also to exclude the regular delegates from
Alabama, who were appointed by a new Con
vention called by the Democratic Committee
of the State. The history of the cases is this.
After the secession at Charleston, the Demo-
cratic Central Committee of Louisiana, the
only association in that State having the power
to assemble the Democracy in Convention,
called together the State Convention, repre-
senting every county in the State, and that
Convention re-appointed the same delegates TO
Baltimore. A few irresponsible men called
another Convention, at which the Democracy
Of the State were not represented. In the case
NJ of Alabama, the Democratic Central Commit
d tee called q new Convention, TO be elected by
the Democracy Of the several counties. This
VI Contention met, and sent back the regular
! delegates to Baltimore. Anumber of persons,
$ however, issued a call, published in only threC
n papers in the State, addressed 10 the people,
l,ot @ba Darnooraox Of Alohspaar for atdfhpr