The Cadiz Democratic sentinel. [volume] (Cadiz, Ohio) 1854-1864, 1860-10-17
Mr.. Douglas on Regular NOmimn-
...t ftOnS

"E' DOosiaS OF heguluP NOmin8'
.t tiOns.
The great gun of ''lhe Douglas democracy, i,
, which they invariably fire off when they wish t
persuade the timid and hesitating that it i
, their duty to vote for Douglas, however littl
; they may approve his principles, is the regular
J ty oi his nomiaation, and the obligation on al
democrats to abide 'regular nominations"
We have already exposed the falsity of th,
pretension that he is, in any sense of the word
} the regular nominee Of party, not even of thu
J motley crowd which remained in the Front
street Theatre after the Convention broke nm
and enacted the farce OF "the nomination We
have shown that in the meeting in the theatre
OF IVA men, some of whom were regularly -elec.
ted delegates, and some of whom had no sem
b'ance otright to be so considered, he received
on the last ballot 1917 votes acd was then de-
clared the nominee, in defiance ofthe rule which
J requires 202 votes, or two thirds OF q full Con-
vention, to constitute a regular nomination.
We have urged, in addition to the foregoing,
that almost all the delegates from sll the South
ern States from Oregon and California, and
large portions of the delegations of other States,
persistently opposed his nominution and repu.
dated his principles; that his supporters were
almost exclusively from the Northern States
and that his nomination is almost, il not alto
gether, as sectional as that of Mr.. Lincoln
For this the friends of Mr.. Douglas have de-
nounced us, and all who think with us. with
great bitterness and most Firtuous indignation.
insisting that the opposition to him by united
south-by all the certain democratic States
affords no reason why he should not be regard
ed and supported as "the regular nominee of the
democratic party!" In re ference to this branch
OF the case, we shall only copy the following
from the Richmond Enquirer, and beg the par
ticular attention OF democrats to the extract
from M. Douglas speech in 1852, in which he
eloquently describes the dangers OF a sectional
nomination, and exposes the wickedness Of the
course he is now pursuing in 1860:
s~ f.Fa From the Richmond Enquirer l.
On the 7lh of July, 1852, the Hon. Stephen
A. Douglas addressed the democracy Of Rich
.mond, Va, in the African Church. From the
speech prepared by himself published in the
Enquirer ofJuly Goth, 1852, we make the sub.
Joined extracts. It will bo remembered Chat at
the Baltimore Wing Convention Of 1852, the
North demanded the nomination OF General |
Scott and the South resisted the demand
Commenting upon the sectional aspect OF that
nomination, and the deptorable results that
would come from it, Mr.. Douglas said: --,
"Well, General Scott received the nonina
ton msanpaoHsly,' according to the official pro
ceedings of the Convention. Laughter.1 Eel |
low-citizens, did you ever hear of a unanimous
nomination which was made in defiance of the
fifty times repeated protest and re,nonstrances
OF the delegations from one half ofthe States of
the Union represented in the Convedtion?-
Every Southern delegation voted against him
more than fifty times, day after day and night
after night, and yet the nomination was unan-
lInous. Great laughter. The nomination of
uenera' Scott, therefore presents to the Amer
1can people his extraordinary anomaly. For
the first time in the history of our party con-
tests has a sectional nomination ever been fore
ed upon either of the two great parties! You
growing out of partisan strife and political con.
tests; you may tremble at the scenes through
which we all recently passed, connected with
the slavery agitation; yet there was nothing in
all that so perous to the Sa ETY. of the Union !
as a sectional nomination for the presidency, |
Dhere the North demanded the nomination of . +
man on a sectionat issue Ana tie del
sgat'oa from eserg Southern State aatho,t ercep-
hoa, resisted the mominatioa as dangerous to their r
rights and 'nstituhnns. 4 nonunation fo1red M z
on The SouHtby the free soil lwng of The mtig par q
" North is nor pr esnted 10 the -4mertcan people
IS nnafaneoaS nopl'7eat on - .g.cg ~.
"H matters mt uhether The North Or The South y
orced the no'lRnatton upon Meupon the other, the {
DANGER coRsists in the fact that tervtoaTa5 line a
!lUlted mems opjnions, that Northern men rere =
me aDay and the Southern men another. But, az y
er the nomination is made, we are told that it .
YRS ldlr compromise, because the South re a
'eiVed the patforlniaHd the North obtained the g
candidate under the direction OF men whu ',ef' /,
md 'spt upon the platform. Thus we have
Winfield Scott before us for the presidency-
Aiter mature dsFveration, be proceeds to accept a
he platform. and to write the letter which he
lad promised Mr. Archer in the private note ,
hat was found in Bctts's breeches pocket"- :,
Laughter. s.- ..a #1 Va .fza#
II the reader viii substitute "Stephen A.
Douglas for Winfield Scott" he will have
lst and complete condemnation of hissown
ominaton from his own lips. Such nomi-
alton OF Gen. Scott, he pronounced, would =
convert good General into bad President" :,
nd We may ask if the result would not be V
qually disastrous 10 Il Senator? A @% "S y
IfMr Douglas c)ula urge the facts CONNECT :, -
with Gen. Scott's nomination as ''dangerous' ',
1the South, from the divisions that existel N .
altmore III 1852, what circumstances would
aliate the evil from the same causes in the a
emocratic party ii tS6o? "Out Of thine own v
louth do we condemn thee" 90" p" @"'9"
arq A.- Sy.s a&F" es
- Tonic. u
From Col. Albert Pike, M. c.. from Arkan- ", y,