Richmond daily Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1842-1861, 1860-05-11

ate Mr. Bel protested against its passing a NiO0"
Of the Missouri compact as unsettling the principles es-
abshed by the compromise Of 1850, and as re-oPening
a sectional controversy which might imperh the peace
and safety Of the Union. In the controversy on the ao
mission Of Kansas in March, 1855 Mr. Bell took decided
ground against the so-caed Lecompton constitution anu
made elaborate speech charging that that measure
tended directly to the overthrow Of the Union.
The Virginia Democratic delegation
The Examiner Of yesterday commences its leader by
saving course of the Virginia delegation at
Charleston not only fully sustained the ancient prestige
and influence Of the Virginia Democracy, but has so
far have been able to learn, met the entire APP
prevail Of their constituency" The ider, to the con-
tary thinks that the proceedings at Charleston Demon
srate that the prestige" Of the Virginia Democracy
gOne-that the scepre has departed-and that virginia
no longer exercises controlling influence IN the eoun-
ellis Of the party We think the Iader is right Inc
Virginia delegation played very humble and very u-
dcrOus part Charleston Some OF the delegates them
selves Mr. Glass Of Lynchburg and Mr.. Nost OF Staun-
ton, for example, have testified their chagrln al the
course Of the delegation and have uttered their conden
nation in terms equally emphatic and pointed The pro-
ceedings as published, do not show that any Virginia
delegate figured in the Convention, except Mr. FISHER
and be made himself most conspicuous By withdrawing
from The 5olg! Assuredly if the delegation from Vir-
GINA sustained the ancient prestige and influence Of the
Virginia Democracy, in the Charleston Convention the
ancient prestige and influence Of the Virginia Democracy
must have been enthusiastically small
But the Examiner gives US the information that the
course Of the delegation has the entire approval of
their constituency" We are sorry our contemporary
was not more specific. We would like to know what
mart of their coure-what acts Of the delegaton-which
Of the conflicting positions occupied by the delegation,
the Examiner alludes 70. Was 1t their accepting the
l;t,g, of Alabama and other Southern States, which
demanded the reputation of Squatter Sovereignty and
che concession Of the right to protection OF slave property
in the Trrores-or their retreat from that position at
forwards which meets he entire approval of their con-
s-irencvg" Was 10 their resolution to act a unit
the subsequent division Of the Of the State that meets
he entire approval of their constituency" Was it the
vote of the majority for Hunter the minority for
Douglas that meets "the entire approval Of their con-
,tuencv" Was it the remaining Of the majority in the
Convention. or the withdrawal of minority from it. that
meets .the entire approval of their constituency'-
VIII the Examiner favor with answers to these ques
tious2
centre approval" without qualification. It is only so
far as &c has been able to learn" We regret that the ES
amuer has not aved itself of some sources of learning
that were under its eyes L might have easily seen, for
instance that the EHgsr1 thinks the Democratic party
viii be dsmembercd unless something is done at Balt
more which was only not done, but was obsinately
refused to be doue at CearestOn-namely-the adoption
of resolution for the protection Of slave property in the
Territories, and that the Enquirer appauds without re-
serve the course of the delegates who seeded no
strained inference that the Of the Virginia deega
ton does not meet the approval Of the Enquirer and
the MANY who accept its teachings. The Examiner
rai.h, have seen similar sentiments expressed by the
Dauyine dyDerl. Il might have seen that the Lynch
bur, Rsna5Lcsu and Stanton ViNlie1tor have been
sc.1rug and sco,lug the delegation very severely. It
might have seen that the Democracy Of Petersburg had
called meeting 20 ascertain whether the course Of the
delegation met their "entire approval OF not an inyes-
,.-ati0u which resulted in proving the negative.
The fact is the Examiner spoke at haphlzard So far
as there Las been an expression Of opinion 10 has been
rather arlas. than IN approval Of the OF the de
legation At leas. the matter is in doubt and u ought
no. TO De permitted so to remain We must therefore
dissent from the conclusion of our respected conempo-
cy Is uoalc.ou until the adjournment Of the Baltimore
Convention" We think, on the contrary, that it is all
important that they should act before The meeting Of that
Convention TIE delegation require TO be instructed
It s plain enough that they do not know what TO do
In Charleston part Of them doing thing and
the other part another bius-and the whole Of them do
ing one thing to-day and undoiug it tomorrow. They
were completely bewldered, and came as near making
themselves subjects for the Apology of "Mozis Ad-
dums" as one can conceive. We, therefore, feel our
selves constrained TO urge the assembling OF State Con
ventoa as speedily as possible That delegation should
never be allowed to 60 another Convention, without
being told distinctly what they must do when they get
there better thing still would be to send new dele
CATION but as that hardly to be expected it is ndis
peusaba that the views of the party should be made dis
t1cty known for the guidance of those who stumbled
and lost th,ir way badly at Charleston for want Of
guidance By an means then, lie, the Democracy of the
STATE be called together.