The weekly north Iowa times. [volume] (McGregor, Iowa) 1857-1867, 1860-07-18
MISCELLANEOUS.
Governor JOhnsOn's Acceptance of TN G
Douglas Nomination.

The following Is the speech OF Hon. Her
schel V. johnson, of Georgia, On Tuesday
last, at the National Hotel, accepting the
nomination for the Vice Presidency on the
National Democratic ticket:
Mr.. Chairman Gentlemen Of the Erecutire
Committee Of tie National Dcaocratic
party, and ,tello,o citi:eas::
l was taken by surprise when | received
a tclegraphic dispatch in Baltimore, at
three o'clock this day, that the Hon Brni.
Fitzpatrick had declined the nomination
rendered him by the Democratic convcn-
ton, and that it was demanded Of me to ac-
cept it. II is known to many Of you that
my name was freely mentioned in Baltimore
in connection with this nomination, and
that persistently refused to countenance
it, but invariably urged that if Georgia were
to be thus honored, it was due to another
of her sons distinguished for his talents
and great public services. This was my
earnest desire, and the desire Of the dele
gation Of v which was a member. But The
convention, in its wisdom, deemed it best
to nominate statesman of Alabama 1t
was entirely satisfactory. Alabama is the
child of Georgia, and tie mother cordially
|
her daughter. Those are the circumstan-
ces under which have been assigned this
distinguished position, and which demand
that disinclination should yield to the voice
Of duty.
The National Democratic party is in
peculiar condition. 1T is asSailed in the
house of its protessed friends, and threat
ened with overthrow. The country is in a
! Ii,, r. -, u
sectional conflict which may sweep down all
political parties and terminate in dissolu-
ton Of the Union. 1t is the duty of pa
triOts and statesmen to unite in avertng
these threatened calamitics. 1t may be
appropriate to refer to the circumstances
which impcril the National Democracv.-
The Alabama delegation went to the Con-
vcntion at Charleston instructed to demand
the incorporation into the platform of the
party, the proposition that Congress
| should intervene for the protection of slaves
in the Territories, and to Withdraw if the
demand should be refused. it was refused.
and, think, properly refused. That dele
CATION did retire, and with them a large por-
ton of the delegations from the cotton
States. Why should they have retired p
The record shows that if they had rena ned
at their post they had the power to prevent
the nomination Of any candidate who might
be obnoxious to the South. thus reduced
by secesSions, the Convention adjourned to
Baltimore, and requested the States to i'll
the vacancies in their respective delega-
tons. The Convention re-assembled on
the 18th inst. The seeding delegations
were returned, some accredited to Rich
mond, and others to Baltimore by the way
Of Richmond, and instructed to ,aalle the
same demand, and to Withdraw if it should
| be refused. Delegates were appointed in
| Louisiana, Alabama and Georgia by the
National Democrats OF those States, to fill
the vacant seats of the secedcrs. Those of
Alabama and Louisiana were admitted, and
the seeding delegates from Georgia were
admitted to seats. They all took umbrage
at the decision Of the Convention touching
the various contests for seats. They re-
| tired. organized and nominated Candidates
for the Presidency and Vice Presidency,
| and they claim to be the '.National Dcnoc-
racv of the United States' Now, if they
were actuated by ''principle," if it was Their
purpose, in good faith, to obtaiy. the recog-
ntion of the principle of Congressional
protection for slavery in the Territories,
why not wait until proper time arrived to
bring that subject before the Convention,
and then, according to their instructions,
withdraw from the body? The reason is |
palpabe: they were waging war against
distinguish ID man, not for the maintenance
Of ''principlc;' they We're willing to jpop-
ard the integrity Of the Democratic party |
and the triumphs of its cherished principles |
rather than see its will proclaimed in the !
nomination OF the favorlte. Admitting |
for the sake Of argument, Mr.. Douglas to be
obnoxious as they allege he is, yet there
never was time when the South united |
could not have defeated his nomination.
Why, then, should they have seeded -
Why not remain at their post? Why seek
to dismember and destroy the party? | |
question not the patriotism of any, but the
people will hold them responsible, 500 ner
or later for all the i'll that may flow from
their errors | said the demand for Con
eressonal Intervention was properly re-
jected at Charleston, and why do | say so ?
Because it was the agreement of the North
and the South that the slavery agitation
should be removed from the halls of Con
gress, and the people Of the Territories be
left perfectly free to regulate their domestic
institutions in their own way, subject to
tut CONSTITUTION Vi tllc \ ilitEI SlaiCS.--
This was thr principle of the compromise
measures Of 1850, and practically applied
in the Nebraska Kansas act in 1854 1t
was adopted by both the great political
parties of the United States in 1852. 1t
triumphed in the election of Franklin
Pierce in that year, and of James Bu-
chanan in 1886. 1t is, perhaps, the best
ground of compromise between the North
and the South which human ingenuity can
devise, and by it the Democratic party at
least, Of all sections, should be willing to
abide 1t gives advantage to neither sec
ton over the other, because it refers all
questions of dispute between them, either
as to congressional OF territorial power over
subject Of slavery, to the final arbitrament
of the Supreme Court of the United States.
1t is therefore safe for the South Its prac-
teal working is not without satisfactory
results When the people of territory
desire slave labor, and the soil and climate
are suited toit, slavery will go-whcre these
conditions do not exist it will not go. This
finds an illustration in New Mexico, where
slavery is established, and that in those ter
ritories where it is excluded Only few
days ago propositions to repeal the sla-
very laws of New Mexico We're made and
rejected on the one hand, and the anti-sla-
very law of Kansas on the ether was made
and rejected in the Senate. Suppose these
propositions, or either of them, had pre-