The Bedford gazette. [volume] (Bedford, Pa.) 1805-current, 1860-07-13


were admitted.
One delegation Uhe Seceders) appeared
from Texas. This was not elected by the
people, or by any Convention. but was ac-
credited by the State Central Committee
Owing 10 the position OF Texas-her large size
and great distance from the Convention, and
difficulty Of calling Convention, this delega-
ton was also admitted
There was one contested seat from Massachu-
settsone from Missouri, cnslrom Della ware, three
from Arkansas, six from Louisiana, nine from
Alabama ard ten from Georgia. These were
referred 20 the Committee on Credentials, then
consisting of twenty-five members.
THIS Committee, after session of several
days, reported by an average vote of about if-
teen to ten, in iavor of the admission of the
Seceders from Delaware, two Seceders and one
new delegate from Arkansas, the new dele
gates from Alabama and louisiana, and one-halt
of each from Georgia. The report of the
Committee was adopted in every case, except
that of Georgia, in which all of the Seceders
were adnilted. By this action of the Conven-
ton, seventeen votes were admitted 10 ihe
Convention contrary TO the views of the Sece-
ders. Although this could in no way effect
=
and although every member OF the Convention
had Ivoted for and acknowledged the rule
which declared that the Convention should
Judge OF the qualifications OF It's own members,
yet this was considered sufficient ground for a
further secession Of 50 members.
The Convention proceeded TO make It's
nominations, passed an additional resolution on
the subject Ct the platform, appointed j nation
al committee and adjourned. OF The seventeen
votes before mentioned, sixteen were IN lieu
OF SeCeGers from Louisiana Alabama and Arkan-
sa s--ont haii vote from Massachusetts aud
Missouri each being contested On other grounds
-5l and 30, or l0l deducted from 5J3, lett
in tie Convention 2O2 members TO which
were added the I6 pew delegates making 2lS
members.
On the first and second ballots at Baltimore,
several of the delegates declined TO vote--on
! the second ballot Judge Douglas received 1914
votes 10 10 tor all other candidates and the
, remainder blank. After the first vote Gov.
! Church, OF New York, offered resolution de-
/ claring him nominated and by implication re-
scindDg the resolution Of Interpretation and
instruction 10 !he Char adopted at Charleston.
Objection being made Gov. Church withdrew his
.
ed by Mr.. Ciaek OF Missouri aad delegate from
Virginia ItNwas then distinctly put by the
President tboth the affirmative and the negatiye)
and adopted BY accIamalion and without a
dissenting voice 10 the Convention.
As W. have already seen, the Secedars at
Charleston, adjourned to meet al Richmond,
on the lI,h OF June. At that time and p lace,
they met and adjourned until the 2lSt Of the
same month.
At Baltimore the 30 Seceders were jorned
by 10 Cf the Secedels from Charleston South
/ Carolina with s members and Florida with
3 remaining az Richmond) met IN another part
ct tae city, organized an opposition, or hostile
Convention, gathered up some fifteen additou-
al delegates i.om some quarter, or other, and
with 100, delegates OF all descriptions nomIoa-
ted Brecklnridge and Lane. Al least 80 of
those delegates were in the Charleston Con
ventIon and aided in the adoption Of the rules
OF that body, one Of which required majority,
or l52 members TO constitute quorum Tor the
: transaction OF any business.
baye already stated that the admission oi
II votes contrary to the wishes Of the spcrders
did not af-eg the result. On the second ballot,
Judge Douglas had 1914 votes. Al others Is
balance declining 10 vote Deduct the II
votes from 1914 and you have l643, and add
them to ID you have 80 votes for all Others
There still being,more than quorum present and
voting and Judge D. having received more than
two thirds Of the votes given. he is clearly
entitled 10 the support OF every Democrat who
Acknowledges the binding force OF nominating
conventions. TO say that he is not and that
3reckinTidge IS the regular nomnee Of the par
" seems 10 me TO BE- an insult 10 the undprstan-
ding of every impartial voter. l have fall con-
fdence in the wisdom and patriotism OF the
masses of the Democratic party Of the country,
and hope that upon sober reflection the people
everywhere viii as heretofore rally 10 the sup
port oi regular nominations, and preserve the in-
tegFity of The party. Ia the present aspect of
affairs, 1t becomes important to determine COR
rectly who Is responsible for the present silua-
ton OF the party. l assert that the Seceders
and their allies aud a5ettors, alone are response
Die. There are but two reasons given by them
selves for the secession. The platform al
Charleston and the admission Of the II dele
gates al Baltimore. These propose to consId-
er very briefly. Before do this, however,
venture to assert that there are at least three
causes which have led to this result First,
the failure OF the Convention to adopt "Lnter-
ventlop" instead f"Non-Inierventlon" by Con-
gress with the question of slavery il the terrific
ries. Second, the desire among the lriends Of
the Seceders, if DOT among themselves, to bring
about dissolution OF the Union I'sell Third.
the personal hostility of some of these gentle
men and others high IN authority, towards Judge
Douglas. These propositions shall also be brief
" considered. The FIRST secession Of 81 mem
berS tooh Dlace at Charleston oo H.. o9or,;,,,
of the Platform. ThI8 we have already seen
was simple re-attiTmation Of the Cincinnati
platform OF 1886 The boilers desired the con-
yenlion to declare in favor OF Congressional Tn-
:erventlon 10 favor of slavery it toe Territories.