Staunton vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1860-1896, 1860-06-08
Northern State that voted for Pierce in 1852

tration Democrats, was larger for State
Treasurer and Superintendent of Public
Schools than that cast for the regular Dem
oeratic ticket. Even this was effected by
running the opposition ticket in the
Southern part Of the State, where Black
Republication was unpopular, as Know
Nothings aud opposed to Lincoln. and
in the Northern part. as Aboltionists
In the Southern part of the State. the Op-
position candidates, who were leading Fill
more Know Nothings, disclaimed the sup
port Of Lincoln; and by such management
and combination, assisted by all the power
and influence Of the Administration, the
regular Democratic candidates for State
Treasurer and Superintendent Of Public
Schools, were defeated by small majority.
Douglas, however, carried the Legislature
and was elected to the u. S. Senate over
Lincoln and the Administration both, which
is sufficient to justify US in the assertion
that he can do it again.
The extract which we publish at the re-
quest Of our correspondent, from the speech
Of Mr.. Butler. of Mass, is tissue of mis-
statements from beginning to end. Our
correspondent terms Butler Douglas DEL
egate, sent by Douglas constituency.
Mr. Butler was elected as Douglas Dem
ocrat. but on his arrival at Washington city
it was discovered that he was traitor in
the camp. and would avail himself of
the most opportune time to stab Doug
las. His delegation, believing him to be
treacherous. refused to make him it's Chair
r.an. Their saspicions we're just, for a.
the very moment his vote would have serv.
ed Douglas, by giving bin majority. he
asked to have it changed; and after that
voted for JEFF. Davis, who 1t no time re-
ceived over one vote. This shows how far
Butler was actuated by honest motives in
declaring himself for Douglas before he was
appointed to Charleston. He wears upon
bis face the marks Of dishonest man, and
all the apologies man could offer for him,
could never relieve him of the stamp Of
meanness which nature has written all over
his countenance
The assertion that the adoption of any
rule was made the condition Of the Middle
States remaining in the Convention is sim
ply untrue Virginia had made no provis-
ion for dissolving her connection with the
Convention, and Gid not intend to. potwi,h
standing the blatant threats of one or two
members Of the delegation The assertion
that Douglas was not the choice of maioy-
ity Of the whole electoral vote, is simply un-
true. The unit vote operated in bis favor
in New York, and against him in sevaral
other States. In Ohio and Indiana there
was not single delegate against him, and
Mr.. Butler falsides the history of the Con-
vention when he asserts that there were =
Even if there had been, as there were in
New York, the unit vote was simply carry
ing out the instructions of their constitu-
ents, aud it is not legitimate to assume that
the majority cast was not bona fde, when
it was done in obedience to instructions
from the creators Of the delegations. In
Georgia. Alabama, Tennessee, Arkansas.
Kentucky and Louisiana aud perhaps other
States, there were Douglas delegates who
did not vote for him on account either of the
unit vote or Of instructions enough to have
overbalanced the votes which were per SC
against him in the New York delegation. -
Is it fair to take from him in the one in
stance, and not give to him in the other?-
But MIR. Butler is not competent witness
He went to the Convention to betray Doug
las. and did SO. We have before US his
tory of his entire manevreing both at home
aud at Charleston, and we can draw ns other
inference from it. than that Mr.. Butler is
an unprincipled politician.
The best evidence we can adduce to sus-
tain the assumption that the delegates to
Charleston who seeded did not represent
their constituents, is the fact that public !
meetings are being held in every one ofthe
States whose delegates left the Convention,
denouucing their action, and insisting on
being represented at Baltimore. If they
did represent their constituents, then those
constituents are faithless to the compromises
~ WV DO"ioCioCio P"'1y CutOicu luto ~
their solicitation and upon their demand
They are false to the solemn promises made
both in word and act, and untrue to every
obligation that fair and legitimate con-
tract imposes
In regard to the action of the delegates
from this District to Charleston, we have
but few words in reply to our correspond
ent.
We never assumed that Mr.. Douglas was
the first choice of the Democracy of this
District that he was preferred to Mr.. Hun
ter or MIR. Wise previous to the meeting of
the Charleston Convention. We assumed
that if there was no chance for the nomina-
ton Of one Of Virginia's distinguished sons,
then Mr.. Douglas was their choice. We
believe SO yet, and the more so since the re-
cent meeting in Rockingham endorsing the
action of DR.. Moffett and Mr.. Yost at
Charleston, and the frequent and extensive
intercourse we have had with the people
since our return from Charleston. We be-
lieve-in fact we know-that in the present
condition Of political affairs, Mr.. Douglas is
now decidedly the choice Of the Democracy
Of the Tenth Legion District, and it is our
purpose at Baltimore to endeavor to repre-
sent that choice. We have assumed, and
now assume, that We represented the Dis
trct at Charleston There has hean ma