Western sentinel. [volume] (Winston [i.e. Winston-Salem], N.C.) 1856-1886, 1860-07-13

L
constitutional delegates was simply to OBJ
tain such recognition of the true intent
and meaning Of that platform as would
prevent future difficulties and misconstrnc-
tions. And many of US were willing for
harmony's sake to be satisfied with low
er standard OF construction than we had
originally insisted upon. But no proposal
would be listened to by the Douglas man
ayers.
Let us here remark, that all along we
had the highest respect for the character
and past services of Judge Douglas, but
that we could not accept him with the
Cincinnati platform unexplained, because
to do so. would be TO accept aud endorse
his interpretation OF it, to which we cesld
not consent. There may have been those
who made war npon judge Douglas. To
that war, one way or the other, North Car
olina was no party. We may have regret
ted the unf:iendly relations existing be-
tween the President and Judge Douglas,
or between the friends of the President
and those Of the Senator from illinois,
We are not the apologists ofthe President
nor are We the defamers OF Judge Doug
las. We think the Democratic party and
its principles matters Of far greater moment
than either OF these gentlemen, or than
or any other number. We think that the
rights of the masses of great party-the
| dominant party III Uuion of thirty-three
States, containing thirty millions of people
| are becoming cheap enough when one
man can say-such and such are n2y no.
tions, and unless the Convention agrees to
these notions, [ will not consent to be nom
mated, and then his friends come into Con
| verton to work all tricks, determined to
swerve the principles and sacrifice the
rights Of the party to this oaaenaan. When
| this became apparent, there d5d arise for
the first time strong ant-Douglas feelings
at the South, as resenting this die
tation on the part of Judge Douglas friends
with whose movement it was impossible
not to connect flat gentleman himself
Not even when eight of her Southern
sisters left her at Charleston-le the Con-
venton there,-did North Carolina cease
her efforts at treconc:liation-cease to labor
for harm ony. She conferred with the re-
ing Southern States-with the seceeding
States, and with what were supposed to
be the more conservative Northern States,
with the view of arriving at and agreeing
apaSa2s 4as4aa AEa 81 a. sfala staas
sJDnld return to their. places in the. Coux.
vention, and the unity of lhe body be ras
stored. Then first wesi found that tie
Douglas leaders werdgpppeaed to the re
storator OF that nIiity-were opposed Sto
the return OF those Withdrawing States
for the first time, indeed, was il found that
any body could be opposed to the restora-
ton Of the unity andenatlefalify of the
Convention. Why this opposition on the
part OF the Douglas managers might have
easily been surmised at Charleston-it
was made perfectly apparent at Baltimore.
Indeed, rather over-zealous Douglas men
let the secret out in the sears, that the ob-
iect was to six up" Douglas delegations
from all these States and Dust the regular
ones. =
The result of these plans became appar-.
ent at Baltimore With the numericaEs
and, sti" more, the voting power of the
Convention largely in their hands owing
to the operation of the unit rule and the
withdrawal of fifty two Southern delegates.
the Douglas managers determined to car
ry things with high hand, and they did
50. Their tone had become reckless, def
ant, domineering. They were evidently
determined to exclude the regularly APP
pointed delegates from the Southern
States; and fill their places with creatures
of their own, as per programme, and they
ana and Arkansas. They failed to get. up
any showing from, Mississippi, Texas,
South Carolina or Florida, as indeed no
application was made from either of these
last named States.
Among other incidents, all pointing in
the same direction, we may allude to the
cases Of Mr. Hallet, from Massachusetts,,
| and Mr. 991ardy, from Missouri These
| were regular delegates from their respec-
tive districts-were unable TO attend at
| Charleston, but did attend af Baltimore
| they notifit d their substitutes OF their ina
bility to attend in the first instance,
and Of their ability to attend in the Sc
cond. The principals do attend at Balti-
more, and are outset to make way for their
substitutes-need we add that the princi-
pals are not Douglas men, but that the
substitutes are. But this instance of ine
justice, however gross, is only individual
in IFS character, and would not Of itself
| justify decided action. The cases of the
States of Alabama and Louisiana are more
| grave in character, as they involve the
| riOhtu apd ,,ripoiplac of nartv 0rUaniZa-