Arkansas true Democrat., 1860-06-02
The End of Secession Address to the
 National Democracy.

The End of Secession Address to the
 National Democracy.
 The undersigned. members of the National De- mocratic party, supporters of its principles, and deeply anxious, by promoting its harmony to pre- serve unimpared the efficiency of its organization, desire to join in counsel with their democratic brethren throughout the United States.
 The proceedings of the convention recently as sembed at Charleston, have developed diver gence of opinion between the delegations of the different States in relation to the principles which form the basis of our Union. The national demo- cratic platform adopted at Cincinnati ill 1856, met the cordial approval of all who believe these United States to be-what their very name importS-a union of states equal, sovereign and endowed ill all respects with equal rights. This approval was based on what seemed to us to be the plain mean ing of the resolutions embraced in that platform During the four years, however, which have since intervened, it has become painfully apparent that tine construction deemed by manitestly ri ght, IS controverted by many members Of our party; that other principles are supposed to find counte- nance in that plattorm-princip pies, in our judg- ment, subversive of the true theory of hegovern- ment, and of the constitution to which ouf Union owes 1t birth, and on whose preservation its perma nent existence depends.
 What is the history of the recent convention at Charleston? Seventeen States, forming majori ty of the whole, adopted with remarkable unanimity | platform of principles so worded as to avoid the possibility of mlsconstructiOn-princip deemed political aXioms by all who uphold the equal ri ghts of the States the very basis of the conederacy. Many delegates rom the remaining sixteen States concurred in opinion with this ma ority, conspcu- ous amongst whom were delegates rom Pennsyl- vana and New Jersey.
 The States which adopted this planform give electoral votes which can be relied on with abso- lute certainty in favor of democratic nominees, and well grounded confidence is entertained of | like result in Pennsy vania and New Jersey. These seventeen States, united with Fennsylvana alone comprise a majority of the entire electoral vote of | the United States, able to elect the democratic | nominees against the combined opposition of all l the remaining States.
 | This platform deliberately re ected by com bination composed of small fraction of the dele gates from the l z democratic States and very | large majority of the delegates of the remaining l6 States; and resolution was adopted inits stead simply re affirming the principles oi the Clnclnnat | platform, without explanation interpretation of l it's dspu,ed meaning. This done with the | openly ayowed purpose of enabling the democratic | party to wage battle with some chance ot success | in certain northern and western States by present.
 ing to the people as its doctrines principles openly | and expressly repudated by majority of the de mocratic State delegations, and by a majority ap- | preaching unanimity of the democratic electoral l vote of the Union.
 The delegations of eight States, together with portion of that of Delaware, faithful adherents of our party and firm supporters of its principles, were | thus, by sheer force of votes cast by delegates from States that will certainly for the repub | ican candidates, compelled to withdraw from the conv ention because, in the language of a distn- gushed delegate, they felt q that 1t was burning l imputation upon the honor and patriotism of the party that, claiming to be national, and claiming to have principles for its guide it should acknow- edge for its declaration of faith creed upon which are placed two distinctly opposite interpretations | by it's own advocates"
 1 W cannot refrain from expressing admira rion and approval of this lofty manifestation of adherence to principe rising superior to all con alterations of expedency, to all trammels ot party and looking with single eye to the defence ot the constitutional lights of the States.
 Tine delegations of other democratic States, however, (includng few delegates from the seced- ing States, not less faithful i'll devotion to prnci- pies, were more hopeful of obtaining from their brethren some satisfactory recognition of sound | principles, and decided on remaining ill the con venton after distinctly declaring, however, theiI determination also to withdraw Ii their just expec tations should be disappointed.
 It is thus apparent that there was almost entire unanmity of principle III the delegations of the only States on which absolute reliance can be piac- ed for democratic electoral votes while there exist. ed diversity of opinion as to the line ot pohcy best calculated to secure the triumph ol those principles Nor is 1t matter of surprise that Ill conuncture 50 unexpected and anomalous; when, in the enun- citation of democratic principles, the voice of Nir ginia was overborne by that of Ohio, and Louisia. ma and Arkansas were forced to succumb to Yer mont and Michigan, there should be excited feel ings, divided counsels, and discordant action.
 In the subsequent proceedings of the convention, however, we think that distant intmations may be A Hpf, fip, Inf thp vention to recede from it's determination and to afford, either by amendment ot the platform, or in some other manner equally satisfactory, such recognition of principles would etiectualy obvi- ate mscODstructi0n and secure the harmonious ac- Iion of the party, and that t was done because of these intimations that the delegations Ot the re- maning democratic States consented to join in the ballots which took place with no other effect than to induce an adjournment to Baltimore to the 18th of June, whilst the seaAAiing delegations adjourned to meet at Richmond M the second Monday of the same month.
 On this state of facts the path seems open for the united action of the party, and no inscperable obstacle opposes restoration of it's harmony So believing, we insist that position as repre- sentatlves of democratic States and constituencies
 forms no just bar to our right, but rather imposes on the duty Of joining our counses with those of our democratic brehren and uniting in their efforts to secure the triumph of our principles.
 It IS pltlH tildt tue convention snail at Bati- more adopt satisfactory platform of principles before proceeding to select its candidates, the req son which dictated the withdrawal of the deega- tons of the eight States will have ceased, and no motive will remain for refusing to unite with their sister States, nor for holding adjourned meeting at Richmond. On the other hand, if the conven- ton, on re-assembling at Baltimore shall disap- point the just expectations of the remaining demo- cratic States, their delegations fail to with draw and unite with the eIght States which have | adjourned to Richmond. In either event there would be unanimous action in support of our lrin- ciples by all the States which can be relied upon | for casting democratic electoral votes.
 From this statement of facts, is it not evident that the wise and prudent course nov to be pursued by the delegations of the eight States is to defer assembling in Richmond until the necessity for l such meeting shall become imperative? Ought they not, in view of tie already altered condition Of affairs, to return to the convention at Baltimore and aid their sister States in the struggle for the | recognition of sound democratic principles? May 1t not be that their votes would now suffice to turn the sce to purge the party creed of all heresies, and to emblazon on the party banner it's honored device oi fidelity to the constitution and the Union in characters so clear to defy misconstruction. | Suppose for moment that in this last struggle l for the right they should again be overborne. Is It not, then, equally plain that the delegations of the other democratic States cannot, for instant, l their pledge of withdrawal from an assembage which shall consistently determine on the sacrifice of principle which they themselves have declared indispensable for their united action to a supposed 1 expediency? And will not all the democratic States thus withdrawing and adiourning to Rich mond, be joined by the true and faithful delegates from Pennsylvania and New Jersey, from Indiana and New York-aye, from every one of our sister States where delegates are found imbued with the living principles of our party, but whose voice has hitherto been sthed in the convention, because of their being in the minority of their respective de- | legations?
 1 For it is striking fact not to be overlooked in l this connections that whether the vote had been taken entirely by States or by delegates, in either event there was clear majority in the convention in favor of the recognition of sound constitutional principles, and it was only by taking part of the votes by States as unts and another part by divid ed States that an apparent and fictitious majority succeeded in preventing that recognition The answer to all the foregoing questions seems to us to be clear and plair. The line of conduct we suggest leads in our judgment, to n reconcia ton of differences on d basis of prinenla Ttlood