Arkansas true Democrat., 1860-04-21
A Bold Stride Towards Disorganization

ticket at the head of its columns The firstis, that it is not the custom in other States ts> do so until after the national conyention is held In assigning further redson, the editor says:
 But. beside the usual custom In tho case, we are not sure that we ever shall advocate the eec- tion of the whole electoral ticket put forward by our late State convention. There IS, at least, one man, name upon that ticket, in whose political orthodoxy we have no faith. That gentleman was nut upon the committee on platforms, and aided in nresentinr DouqLas plGt}orm, which, but for the earnest and eloquent remonstrance of the con tomptible minority, would, in all probability, have been adopted by the convention"
 If the Old Line Democrat repudiates one man, let it repudiate all. The State is entitled to four electors, and we must send four democrats. The objection is a singular one, coming from such a source. It is admitted by Mir. Peek that he edited a Douglas paper in Illinois, and was earnest, if not influential, in his endeavors to send Mir. Douglas to tho U. $. Senate. At a time when, it is charged,' the leading black republicans were urging their friends not to oppose Mr. Douglas; when the latter was advocating " the damnable doctrine of squatter Sovereignty" to which Mr. Peek Is now so bitterly opposed; when Judge Brecsc, and other sound democrats of Hi nois, took the right position and maintained it; then Mr. Peck labored night and day to advance tho Douglas cause. The atti- tude of Mir. Douglas was that of undis- guised hostility to the democratic admin
 stration; his doctrines were then, as now,
 those of squatter sovereignty; and then he received the enthusiastic support ot MT.
 Peek. In the course of year or two, we find this same man, who nearly wore out his lungs shouting for Douglas, in another State, refusing to support democratic elector, nominated by democratic State convention, because he suspects him of being friendly to Douglas! The editor ot the Old Liner professes to support prlnci- pes, not men. Then it was not the man Douglas he supported, but the principles professed by him. In what waters has this man bathed, to wash himself of the
 Douglas leprosy? What drastic cathartic did he find to swallow, by which he was so suddenly purgcd of Douslasism? With what soap did ho wash his hands of the stain he suspects on the hands of others?
 Coming here from an abolition State, with the Douglas brand upon him, he as- sumes q censorship, and passes upon the political orthodoxy of the sentiments of men who were democrats in the South while he was Douglas man in Illinois.
 Another excuse offered for not support ing the democratic electoral ticket is, that if the two-thirds rule is not adopted at Charleston, the minority may bolt and organize a separate convention; and he endeavors to represent the True Democrat as favoring the adoption of the majority rule at Charleston. That is too frivolous to notice now, but we ask attention to what the editor says he will do in that case:
 "But ace shall choose to adopt another course, taking sides with the minority, and advocate the appointment of a ncir electoral ticket pledged to support the nomination of the bolting convention"
 Why a new electoral ticket? Does he n, IL af4 kansas would not vote as Q unit for q southern man, in obedience to the choice of the convention that appointed them? The slur on one or all of the patriotic, southern gentlemen who compose tho elec toral ticket, is gratuitous insult to them and to those by whom they were selected.
 It is intimatcd that if Mr.. Douglas is the Old Liner will not support him, but will seek sound platform with a sound man to stand upon it. Aha, The excuse of Mir. Peek for the support of Mir. Douglas i'll Illinois was, that his opponent was black republican. And will not the of the democratic nominee for President be a black republican also? And why, in the name of all that is con sstent, if ho dislikes Alr. Douglas so much, why did he not advocate the cleo tion of sound democrat, like Sidney Dreesc, over Mir. Douglas in Illinois? He looks forward, he tells us, for bolt, and will support the bolters. And we believe him. We do not wish to see MT. Douglas nominated at Charleston-we have no be- lief that he will be; but if he is the nomi- nee, we must support him without divi sion. From President of these United States down to the constable of Big Rock township, we intend to support the nomi nces of the democratic party. That's our democracy.
 Listen further to the Old Liner:
 6 But there is still another reason why we have lot placed the names of these gentlemen at the lead of our columns. We believe that the State convention had no right to appoint district electors, without, at least the recommendation of the dele rates of each respective district. We believe that n so doing, it improperly assumed the prerogatiye which justly belongs to the district conYentions nd should those bodies, when they meet. refuse O acquiesce in the action of the State invention, nd put forward the names of other men more acceptable to themselves, we shall unhesltatingly ut their names at the head of our columns, and dyocate their election"
 Of course he will. Anything to divide md distract the party-anything to pro- luce discord and confusion. The electors were always nominated by tho State con 'ention; they represent the whole State, md cast the whole vote Good men and rue have been nominated-men of ability md unquestionablc political integrity, and he democracy of Arkansas will vote for hem, whether the Old Liner puts up their names or those of opposition electors.
 The editor of the Old Line Democrat. n the article from which we have made hese extracts, has shown his hand quite plainly. He opposed the action of the democracy of Pulaski county in the largest ounty meeting ever held in the State. He neers at the meeting which nominated a