Mountain Democrat. [volume] (Placerville, El Dorado Co., Cal.) 1854-1860, 1860-05-26
NOMINATIONS.

The National Convention Of the Union partv
composed Of bankrupt politicians, disappointed as.
plrants and needy political adventurers-m men who
have belonged to all parties and been the advocates
Of every faction and iSm-assemblcd at Baltimore
on the 9th Instant. and nominated John Bell Of Ten.
nessee, for President and Edward Everett, Of Mass.
Achusetts, for Vice President and decming il mpo.
little to any principles, or dcsttute of them, or
fearful of rupture III such n mixed gathering, ad.
journed without adopting Platform. They resol.
we'd to ego it blind" aud to deceive the people by
their professions of attachment to the Constitution
aud the Union. II Is n shallow trick and will i'm.
pose upon no one-~A party without principles. or.
ganzcd by broken down party hacks, and led on bv
corrupt poticanss not calculated to take favorably
with the intelligent and patriotic masses. The
people demand something more than an unmeaning
resolution, which amounts to nothing and which
was adopted solely to entrap the unsuspecting.
They want nominees that are pledged 10 q certain
line Of policy, and who will adhere to it. They want
the veXed questions at issue settled, and will sup.
port no men who are too willy or too timid to av0w
their sentiments.
| The nominations were received with cOdness and
disapprobation and the friends Of Gen. Houston,
for whose benefit the Union movement was started,
repudiated the nominees and the action Of the Con.
ventiOn. II is stated that every State with the ex.
ccption Of South Carolina and Oregon, was repre-.
scented in the Convention. but this seems improba.
Bile. In minority Of the States the Union party
has no organization, and how States could be repre-.
scented by a party that has no existence in them,
We can only conjecture. Who sent delegates from
California to the Union Convention? What author
/ lad al Q 4
their action? Selfeccted delegates carry with them
neither influence nor strength. They are RESPONSE.
BILE to no one for their acts, and what they do they
do on their individual responsibility. Did the Ma.
tional o. Convention select delegates to represent
States that declined failed To elect deegatesi II
not who elected them? 1t must be apparent TO
every intelligent that few States, with properly
chosen delegates were represented in the Union
Convention and the candidates Of such weak and
farccnl convention will be regarded independently
running on their own hook" with no prospect Of
carrying single State. Bell has been guilty Of the
egregious folly Of accepting the nomination, but Mr.
Everett will scarcely follow his example. II may
satisfy Mr.. Bells ambition and crafty his vanity ia
run for the Presidency, but less ambitious aud more
sagacious men would decline the dubious honor.
The Convention was very harmonious and trans.
acted business in the most expeditions manner. Ev-
identity no one seemed particularly anxious to Sc.
cure q nomination. On the second ballot John Bell
was nominated. apparently without opposition
There WAS some competition the first ballot, and
Houston and Crittenden each received a AatterinQ
vote, but Bolts. Of Virginia, received but 9<, and
three other Insignificant politicians a still less mum
bcr Taking it altogether, ii was harmless farce,
dScredtable to those engaged in it. and little cal
cuated to promote the interests of those who hoped
to profit by it.