Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1860-02-24
The Alleged Pledges of Delegates to
Charleston.


AS each democratic convention of the
several States meets and appoints dele
gates to the National Convention which
is to meet in Charleston on the Odd of
April, (says the Constitution, } the tele-
graphic agents of the press, instructed
doubtless by interested outsiders, imme-
diately inform the public that the dele
gates, or a majority of them, are pledged
to support some particular one out of the
large number Of candidates for the next
presidency. In the cases where the con-
ventions have, by resolution declared a
preference for any individual, the delega-
ton to Charleston may properly be con-
sidered to be Sin favor of the nomina-
ton" of that person for the presidency ;
but where no such resolutions have been
adopted, and no such preference indi-
Gated, it is safe to conclude that the dele
gates are unpledged, and will vote for
the candidate whom the majority of the
Convention may select with view to the
best interests of the country and of the
democratic party. We know that this is
so with regard to the delegations of
several States whom Geographic newspa-
per correspondents have described as
positively pledged to vote for A, B, or
G. Individual members of those delega-
tons may prefer A to b, or b to G, but
they will not allow their personal feelings
to interfere with the proper discharge of
their duty, or lead them into any COM
initials as to their conduct which could
embarrass their action in the convention
In the morning papers of yesterday,
for instance, Geographic despatch re-
lative to the proceedings of the demo-
cratic convention of the State of Con-
necticut, announced positively, that
eleven out of twelve of the delegates to
Charleston were in favor of the nominal
ton of Judge Douglas. We are crodibly
informed that such is not the fact; that
the Connecticut delegates are wholly I'M
committed to the support of any particu-
lar candidate, and that they will cast their
votes for whomsoever they think most
eligible when the time comes. We have
also heard and seen it asserted, that the
delegation from New York (and by that
we mean the delegation chosen by the
regular democracy Of the State at their
State convention held at Syracuse last
September) is also committed. We have
the best reason to know that this is untrue.
The delegates from New York will pro-
coed to Charleston perfectly free and un-
trammelled, determined to consult with
the democratic delegates from the
several States, and not to endeavor,
as has been alleged, to force the nomina-
ton of any candidate whose principles
are known to be decidedly obnoxious to
the people of any section. The present
crisis in the affairs of this country i'm
poses it as a duty on those who are dele
gated TO select the standard bearer of the
democratic party in the next campaign,
not to allow individual partialities to con-
troll their conduct-not to sacrifice sense
to sensibility; in short not to allow them
selves to be influenced by any other con-
sideration than desire to select a man
who is acceptable to the democracy of all
sections of the Union, in whom they can
fully conGde, and whose principles accord
with those of the great mass of the de-
mocratic party.
The attempt to manufacture popularity
by the aid of these tclepraphic misrepre-
sensations is as improper as it is injudi-
cious, and ought to be exceedingly dis
tasteful to those for whose apparent bene-
fit is made by indiscroot and oyer-zeal-
Gus admirers.