The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1855-1865, 1860-05-25
IS The Statement of the Recreant
Delegates.

Delegates.
The statement" of Messrs. BECKER,
FR1DLEY and EDGERroN, in explanation of
their course at Charleston, is merely con-
fined to recital of the action of the State
Convention, in January last, and narra>
tive of the part taken by the Minnesota
delegation in the Charleston Convention.
The proceedings of the State Convention
are quoted to show, that technically, the
delegates were not instructed to vote for
DOUGLAS, and that therefore, the three dele
gates who voted and labored to prevent his
nomination, were justified in their course by
the action of the Democracy of the State.
There is GOODNESS in this assumption only
equalled by the treachery which it seeks to
justify.
The resolutions adopted at the January
Convention, contained bold, manly and
unequivocal declaration, that DOUGLAS is
the first choice of the Minnesota Democracy
for President, and the further declara-
tion that "our delegates to Charleston are
expected as an expression of the will of the
Democracy Of Minnesota, to support him as
such so long as such support may PROVE
AVAILABLE TO HIM, or for the general inter-
ests ofthe Democratic party" 1t is not upon
these resolutions however, that the three de-
legates apparently rely for their vindication,
but upon the further fact that resolutions
instructiDg the delegation to vote as unit,
for DOUGLAS, until majority should decide
otherwise, were voted down in our State
Convention. In our paper. Immediately
after the Convention adjourned, history
of the resolutions was given in answer to
the structures of the Republican papers,
which we now take the liberty Of reproduc.
ing, as fully meeting the point raised by Mr..
Becker and his associates. The extract, at
the same time, shows that we most signally
failed in the gift of prophecy, in asserting
that there was not man in the delegation
who would violate his pledges:
The resolutions adopted with much unanime
ity, were drafted by General Shields, and WEIR
designed as an expression of the peculia-
Douglas sentiment Of the Convention. As such
they were agreed to by the strongest and most
devoted friends of Douglas in and out of the
body. After having been thus approved, they
were submitted by Hon. e. l.. Becker to
caucus of those delegates who were supposed
to sympathize least with Douglas, and to be
ndort he iufu 0f fho Cd inic frofio
They were agreed upon by that interest, and,
according to the general understanding, were
pressed by Mr.. Becker to the Convention, for
reference, as mere matter of form, to the
appropriate committee. No one anticipated
either opposition or amendment to them on
the part Of any delegate. They were prepared
by Gen. Shields, the oldest and best known
friend of Douglas in the State. No honorable
man will suspect him of preparing resolutions
prejudicial to the interests of his old associate
and colleague. Nor are they thus prejudical
either to Douglas or his principles. For one,
satisfied with the direct manly, unequivocal
expression of preference contained in the first
resolution. The second we regarded as mere
surplusage, and OF no practical account. The
vote in the Convention by which they were re-
ferred to the committee was unanimous. and it
was understood that they were to be reported
back from the committee as an expression of
the sense of the Democracy, without any change
altering their meaning, or lmpairing their tone.
And when, with this expectation, the resolutions
were thus reported back without amendment,
the great body of the delegates was prepared
to vote for them. The introduction of the ad.
ditional resolutions by Col. Robertson-tho
there was nothing in them, abstractly consid.
cred, against which any friend of Douglas
could objeet,--were yet regarded as inoppor.
timely presented, as being in violation Of an
arrangement prescribed by the Douglas inter-
est, and assented to by the opposition, and as
being without any practical Importance. They
were, therefore, under the circumstances, very
properly rejected; while the original resol1.
tions were, with equal propriety, adopted by
an almost unanimous vote.
This is the history of the resolutions, so far
as we had any connection with them, or
knowledge of them. They were prepared BY
General Shielde, at the request Of some admin.