The hydraulic press., 1861-03-30
Correspondence from Live Oak Gro,


that McDougall still had fifty-seven votes. That
was subsequent to voting for Mr.. Nugent.
Corre sp ondence from Live Oak Grove
EDITOR PREss.-Feeling confident, from my
knowledge of your character as gentleman, as
well as from your own assurance, that your
'sstrictures on Mr.. Millers course were prompted
by no spirit of unkindness," but intended as
deserved rebuke; and as you say have put the
case in stronger language than the facts would
seem to warrant; and, furthermore, deeming
your proof not conclusive, but founded on erron-
eous impressions, Lmost courteously submit
few objections to the reasons you offer as the
foundation for your censure of Mr.. NJ.
In your first proposition you say che nom-
mated by an anti-Lecompton Convention"
The Convention which nominated Mr.. Miller
was called by the Central Committee of the Ma
tional Democratic party, Qecompton party, if
you please J members of that committee called
primary meetings in the various precincts
throughout the county. The anti-Lecomptonites
had nothing to do with the calling of either Con-
vention or primary meetings but being satisfied
with our nomination for President they signifed
their desire to join with US in the approaching
contest. welcomed them with open arms, met
with them in caucus, and elected delegates to the
County Convention without reference to their
being Lecomptonites or anti-Lecomptonites. The
delegates so elected were nearly equally divided
upon that point; but, as 1 said in my former
communication, that issue was never mooted !;
for we thought in union our only chance of
| and xya dafaat far M oro
itous to and to the country than the agitation
of an abstract principle, which had long since
ceased to be available for aught but as means
by which scheming politicians sought to obtain
high and responsible position. beg leave there
fore to deny, most respectfully but emphatically,
that Mr.. Miller nominated by an anti-Le-
compton Convention or elected as an anti-Le-
comptonite.
In your second proposition you say, che went
into caucus with the Douglas party, but subse-
quently withdrew and bolted the nomination"
Allow me to quote from the Shasta Courier of
March 10th, remarks which were called forth
under similar circumstances:
"SiXty years ago, in the first inaugural speech
ever delivered from the steps of the capital of
our country to American citizens, Thomas JEFF
ferson uttered these words of wisdom: 4 shall
often go wrong, through defect of Judgment
When right, l shall often be thought wrong by
those whose positions will not command rieac of
the tchOte ground. l ask your indulgence for my
errors, which will never be Intentional and your
support against the errors of others, who may
condemn what they would not, if seen in all its
parts
The Courier adds "We have it from the best
authority, that number of the supporters Of
McDougall and Randolph had declared emphati-
cally, and with bitterness, that they would not
support Gen. Denver, even if he got the nomin-
alton in the Douglas caucus! !'
Now, it must be remembered, that the man
who received the nomination of the Douglas
caucus, in order to be elected in Joint Conven-
ton, must not only get the full Douglas strength,
but likewise a few votes from one of the other
parties Hence, it will be seen, that if dozen
anti-Denver men in the Douglas caucus avowed
apurpose not to abide its action if Gen. Denver
were the nominee, nomination to him would
be nothing more than empty honor, for with
out that dozen Douglas votes he could not get
elected, even though backed by nomination
while to all other candidates, a nomination would
be almost certain election.
Now if these are the facts exhibited in that
''view of the whole ground" possessed by our
Assemblyman, we say that he acted right in re-
fusing to remain with the Douglas caucus.
These, and other similar reasons, were doubt
less the cause why Mr.. Miller, with twenty mine
others-thirty in all-withdrew, leaving twenty
six-less than majority-who proceeded to
make nomination. McDougall was nominated
by fourteen votes, which subsequently de-
clared unanimous. (See PRESS, Feb. 23d.) The
nomination was binding only upon those who
were parties to it and / commend Mr.. Miller
and all others who refused to vote for McDou-
gall, or any other man who is so anxious to pre-
serve his corporeal structure from premature
decay, by very frequently and copiously imbibing
that fashionable decoction termed s'tarantula
juice" Mr.. Millers votes in Joint Convention
were, believe, invariably cast for staunch Union
men and if he did abandon the caucus nominee,
I fail to see any authority for saying that he
abandoned his party.
The caucus alluded to in your fourth PROPOSE
ton was called by Douglas men, and not by Sc
cession leaders, nor for the avowed purpose of
fusion. The call was simply to those in favor of
the Crittenden resolutions. Partizan leaders, as
might have been expected, endeavored to make
capital out of it, but did not succeed and even
if their avowed purpose had been "fusion," all