Clearfield Republican. [volume] (Clearfield, Pa.) 1851-1937, 1860-08-22

never could nave arisen under the cons
gressional convention System. Ifa bare
majority Of the National Convention thus
composed could nominate a candidate, he
might be nominated mainly 10y the anti
| Democratic States. Thus the nominating
power would be separated from tho cleo.
ting power, which could not fail to be de,
structiye to the strength and harmony of
/ the Democratic party. To obyiato this SO.
rious difficulty in tho organization of a
National Convention and at the same
time to leave all the States their full vote,
the two-thirds rulo was adopted. 1t was
believed that under this rule no candi-
date could ever be nominated without
embracing within hetwo,thirds the votes
OF a decided majority of Democratic States
This was the substitute adopted to re
tam, at least IN q great degree, the power
20 the Democratic States which they would
have lost by abandoning the congressional
convention system. This rule was a main
pillar in the editice Of National Conyen-
tlons. Remove 1t and the whole must
become ruin, This sustaining pillar was
broken to pieces at Baltimore by the Con-
vention which nominated Mr.. Douglas
After this the body was no longer q Ma
tional Convention and no Democrat,
however devoted to regular nominations,
was bound to give the nominee his sup
port; he was left free to act according to
the dictates Of his own judgment and
conscience. And here, in passing, may
observe that the wisdom Of the two-thirds
rule is justified by the events passing a
round us. Had it been faithfully observ-
ed no candidate could have been nomi-
mated against the will and wishes Of all
most every certain Democratic State in
the Union, against nearly all the Demo
cratic Senators and more than three
fourths Of the Democratic Representa-
tlyes III Congress Cheers.
rurposely avoid entering upon any
discussion respecting the exclusion from
the Convention of regularly>elected dele
gates from different Democratic States. If
the Convention which nominated Mr.. Dou-
glas was not regular Democratic Conven>
tlOn, it must be confessed that Breckin-
ridge is in the same condition in that res =
pect. The Convention that nominated
him, although it was composed of nearly
all the certain Democratic States did not
contain the two-thirds; and therefore ey-
cry Democrat is at perfect liberty to vote
as be thinks proper, without running
counter to any regular nomination Of the
party. Applause and cries of three
cheers for Breckinridge and Lane" Hol-
ding this position, shall present some OF
, the reasons why | prefer Mr., Breckenridge
to Mr.. Douglas This shall do without
attempting to interfere with any individ,
ual Democrat or any State Democratic or
ganization holding different opinions from
myself. The main object of all good Dem
ocrats, whether belonging to the one or
the other wing of our unfortunate division
is to defeat the election of the Republican
candidates and | shall never oppose any
honest and honorable course calculated to
accomplish this object.
Toreturn to the point from which have
digressed. | am in favor Of Mr.. Brecllin-
ridge because he sanctions and sustains
the perfect equality of all the States with
in the common territories, and the opin-
ion Of the Supreme Court OF tho United
States establishing this equality. The sovs
ereign States of this Union are one vast
partnership. The Territories were acqui-
red by the common blood and common
treasure of them all. Each State, and each
citizen ol each State, has the same right in
the Territories ms any other State and the
citizens Of any other State possess. Nov
what is sought for at PRESENT. is, that por-
ton of these States should turn around To
their sister States and say, 1--WE are holi,
er than you are, and while we will take
our property to the Territories and have
it protected there, you shall not place
your property in the same position. -
That is precisely what is contended for
What the Democratic par y maintain, and
what the true principle Of Democracy is,
that all shall enjoy the same rights, and
that all shall be subject to the same du-
ties. Property this government was fra
med for the protection of life, liberty, and
property. They are the objects for tie
protection of which all enlightened gov.
ernments were established. But it is
sought now to place the property Of the
citizen under what is called the principle
ofquatter sovereignty, in the power Of
! Territorial Legislature to Confscate it at
( their will and pleasure. That's the prin.
| Ciple sought to be established at present
and there seems to be an entire mistake
and misunderstanding among portion oi
the public upon this subject. When was
property ever submitted to the will of the
majority? [''Never." If you mold prop
erty as an individual you hold it indepen
dent OF Congress or Of the State Legisla
ture or Of the Territorial Legislature it is
yours; and your Constitution was made tc
protect your private property against the
assaults Of legislative power. Cheers. j.
Well, now, any set ofprinciples which will
deprive you of your property is against the
very essence Of Republican government,
and to that extent makes you slave fci
the man who has power over your proper
ty to coufiscate it, has power over youl
means of subsistence and yet it is con,
tended that although the Constitution ot
the United States confers no such power
although no State Legislature has any
such power, yet Territorial Legislature
in the remote extremities of the country,
can confiscate your property "a Voice
They can't do it; they amt going tc
do lt.") There is but one mode as point
ed out in the Cincinnati Platform, which
has been as much misrepresented as any