Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1860-09-06
AusVv er to the Claim of the Douglas COM
mIttec, that he is the Regular Nominee
of the Dem Ocratic Party.

AH6W
mittee, that he is the Regular Nominee
of the Dem Ocratic Party.
We extract the following very concise and con-
elusive statement from the address of Messrs W. J.
McILHINEY and C. J. CORwTN, two of the delegates
from Missouri to the late Charleston Convention 1t
furnishes conclusive answer to the labored plausi-
bilities and bold assumption of the uGLAs National
Committee; and it serves to show with some extracts
from other addresses and papers il Missouri, what
gallant contest the States Rights Constitutional De-
mocracy are making:
If it was right to reject a single Withdrawing
delegate, it was right to reject all Their claims
all stood on the same basis. The Withdrawing dele
gates who declared entitled to seats took this
view of the matter, and therefore refused to come
back into the Convention
By this act, the Democracy in Louisiana, Ala
ma and Arkansas were disfranchised. They were
dsfranchised, in opinion to secure votes in the
Convention for Mr.. Douglas
And who were admitted in their places?
The delegates from Alabama thus admitted,
were headed by gentleman named Parsons, who had
never voted the Democratic ticket. and who was
Fillmore electOr in that State in 1856. They were
appointed by Convention called without any Dem
ocratic authority, which was composed of men of
ell parties.
EaThe delegates from Louisiana who were admitted
mad been appointed under similar circumstances.
They received their authority from Convention
called by two clubs and the member of the National
Committee for that State. They were headed by Mr..
Soule who made speeches in favor Of and voted for
the Know-Nothing candidates in the last municipal
election in the city of New Orleans.
Mr.. Hallett, of Massachusetts,, was the regularly
appointed delegate. A domestic affection prevent
ed his taken his seat at Charleston. He was eXclud
ed and his seat given to his substitute. He asserts
that his seat was offered HIM the condition that
he would pledge himself to vote for the nomination
of Mr. Douglas. He refused, and was turned out
Mr.. Clardy, from this State, regularly appointed
delegate. who also prevented from taking his
seat at Charleston by domestic afiliction,
cluded and his seat given to his alternate.
The delegates admitted from Arkansas were ap-
pointed by mass meeting held IN pursuance of a
call which appeared in only one paper-a paper
published in the adjoining State of Tennessee, and
which call was issued without any Democratic au-
thority.
Thus was the Democratic party in the States of
Louisiana, Alabama and Arkansas distranchised,
and the Convention packed; and thereupon the
delegates from California and Oregon, and the
greater portion of the delegates from the slave States
who had remained IN the Convention at Charleston,
withdrew.
At Charleston seven States withdrew from the
Convention, and all but one vote from Arkansas
and two votes from Delaware-102 delegates repre-
senting in all tyone votes None of these delegates
took part in the Convention at Baltimore, which
nominated Mr.. Douglas.
At Baltimore the number of delegates who with
drew is as follows: From Kentucky, TO- Delaware
; Massachusetts, 16; Connecticut 3; Virginia, Is;
North Carolina Is; Missouri 2; Tennessee, Is; Min
nesota 3; Iowa, 2; New York, %; Pennsylvania, 8;
Vermont Representing total of 69I votes The
number who refused to participate in the proceed
ngs or commit themselves their constituents to the
support of its nominees. but remained in the Con-
vention, is, from Kentucky. ) Delaware, Mary
land, 2; Pennsylvania, 9; New Jersey, 9; Missouri
icy votes.
Number of votes withdrawn Charleston and refusing
cept, or excluded from seats at Baltimore, 81
Number who withdrew at Baltimore, 69h
Remaining in the Convention, but not voting, l6H