Daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, Va. [W. Va.]) 1859-1865, 1860-08-03
Friday Morning, Aug. s, 1850.
IN. OIna4n, Of NOnndsviIle, as We NO

Nm. 0IpaAH, Of NOnndSyiIle. as We mo-
1iced in cur report, made very fair sort
of speech to the Douglas men al Wash
inEton HaI, on Wednesday night He IT.
viewed, quite impardally. and for Sn e1-
tempore effort, quite fully, the history of
the split IN the Democratic party. And We
thought that no candid ma1, in listening to
him, could help being convinced thai if
thero vas such thing as a right side 10
wrong creed, that Mr.. Oldham and his
Douglas brethren had the moral of the
Democratic split on their side. They Ger
sainly were the National men Of the party
If there has been any nationality about II
fo7 the las, ten years- They were suppor-
ing the regular nominees, made by the
regularly elected, regularly sent and reEu-
larry organized delegates, Their eAndi-
dates sand where al the candidates stood
in 1856, in favor of non-intervsntion, as
interpreted, exPounded and proclaimed al
Cincinnati, and as advocated by the ora
tors thai stumpsd the country for Mr.. Blu
chauan They stand on the platform
adopted At Charleston, before the seces-
sion, the same platform on which Nr- Rus
sell and the other Virginia delegates
stood ana ballot1ed for Mr.. Hunter fly
seven times, and for thai many times took
their chances OF his nomination. And
jus; here and out of this TACT, Mr.. Oldham
made telling point Either the hostility
of The seceSsiunisGs to Mr. Douglas was
personal or IL was on account Of the plat
form. If il vas personal, they stnlsi6e6
themselves, and i II was not they did the
same thing. Douglas was the same man in
al respects thar he was in 1856, AZ the time
when the South gave him more votes in
the Cincinnati Convention, than they did
Nr. Breckenridge, their present disunion
candidate Douglas was the same man
and advocated the same doctrine OF non
intervention thst he did then, and it
would never do for them after the high
wrought eulogies which often and often.
since Douglas proclaimed his creed, South,
Soundness, to set mp claim that he could
not be trusted with Southern rights. Mr..
Hunter had strained all the points of rhet-
oricsl establishment in compliment TO
Douglas, and had in the full knowledge of
his often-e1pressed opinions on the Terri
torial question. endorsed him as good
enough for the low latitndes. And If the
opposition of the secessionistS was bat of
personal nature, there was no sense in it
and it was simply an unmeauing. empty,
spiteful hostility mere disorganizing
caprice. The platform on which Mr..
Douglas stood Was not, it is true, the one
for which the Virginia delegation had
voted, bot it is the one on which they
stood and took their chances for nomina-
as.ss55ss ls.g. ~ =. sns.5r
would have bad " stand, had bG been
nominated.
This WAS the difficulty 10 nutshell, and
from the GtuIufyI0g dilemma 81 which the
diS1ni0n and secession ErecLinridyeiteJ
were placed by BIZ. Oldham, there il no
sSc9pe, except bya clear, clean aud uncon-
ditionnI back out. VIII thC Erecktdrjdye
men back TbaCS the question. Mr..
OIdh"n thought II doubtful VIII the
DouGIaS men? Mr.. OidbHm could not ses
bow they could do SO with any cDnSiytency
Or regard foF principle. Hs said lbat IN
his view there could bs no truce patched
up that would he effective without alul.
nHGati0n on 0Ds aide or the other. And
We believe that be took the SenxibIG view
% the matter. One or the other wing
must cave In. mud Voc bGLide that wing