Dayton daily empire. [volume] (Dayton [Ohio]) 1850-1865, 1860-07-12

Thus our readers will perceive that out of
the total vote cast hat year, 1907, Mr.. BRiN-
KERHorF received but Hinety:toWri leaving a
majority against him in this county alone, of
SIR thousand, nine hundred and nineteeni
There were at that time only ninetytotu men
in the whole county of Montgomery who would,
by their votes, endorse the abolition doctrines
of JACOB -BRINKERHoFF, - only Hinetyfow
men who would follow the lead of JosBuA r.
GIDDNes and his crew.
1t is now claimed by some of the leaders of
Opposition party in this section,-men and
papers who were most bitter and violent in
their opposition to BRISKERHoFF in 1851
who denounced in unmeasured terms the doc
preferred defeat rather than unite with the
Abolition faction of this State-that the Re
publican organization of the present day oc-
cupies the same position occupied by the old
Wing party, on the National questions. If
this be soft the Abolition faction has not
swallowed up, and does not control, the Wing
party of former days,-why is it that the Abo-
lition candidate for Supreme Judge in 1851,
is now again brought forward, and supported,
not by a faction this time, but by the united
0pposition2 Why is it that many of the
prominent old line Wings of Montgomery are
now supporting him? Why is it that we find
the Journal laboring for his e%lection2
BRINKERHoFF has not changed in the opin-
ions he entertained in 1851, save to become,
perhaps, more ultra in Abolitionism-save to
place himself on the record, beyond all ques-
ton, as in opposition to an established and
constitutional law of the land, solely because
the law in question comes in conflict with his
political prejudices, and because it is denoun-
ced BY those to whom he owes his elevation.
The Platform, too, on which he now stands, is
in substance the same on which he stood
in 1851, when he received but ninety-four
votes in this county. The men, also, who
were prominent in nominating him nine years
ago, are the same men who were prominent
in bringing about his nomination at the late
Republican State Convention. If Mr.. BRIN-
~KERHoFF was wrong in lS5l-and it would
seem that the people of this county considered
him so, by the small vote they gave him at
that time-he is equally wrong now, If his
principles were such as to demand the opposi-
ton of our people at that time, his principles
demand an equal opposition now. To give
him a larger vote at the coming election thar
he received in 1851, would be n virtual admis-
sion on the part of the people of Montgomery,
that they we're wrong in 1851, and that Mr..
BRrNKERHoFF was right-it would prove that
the doctrines of the conservative old line
Wings of Montgomery have given place to the
doctrines of ultra Abolitionism. Is this so?
Is there any man in Montgomery who prided
himself in following the lead of CLAY and
WEBSTER, willing to make such admission
willing to acknowledge to the world that the
old Wing party has been swallowed up by
Abolitionism2 If so, he should vote for BRrN.
%KERHoFF, if not, if he was honest, in 1851, in
his opposition to Abolitionism-he should cast
his vote for THOMAS J. S. SMITH, a man no
only well qualified in every particular for the
position, but in addition, a highly esteemed
and worthy citizen of this county.
Men of Montgomery, choose ye between
~them-SNTH, the conservative, and BRISEER
HoPF, the Abolitionist.