The western Democrat. [volume] (Charlotte, N.C.) 1852-1870, 1861-06-11

ties were appointed to Office by Gov Ellis The
Greensboro Patriot had said I" that in making ap-
pointments but little regard is paid to fitness or
qualification, the main question being is he De-
moeratF" We denied this, and We feel confident
that we were correct in so doing. An article in
the Raleigh Standard, also in reply to the Patriot,
published the day after our paper was published
fully sustained our position. 1t said
No question has arisen nor will arise which will
revive the old party lines and array Democrat against
wing or-Whig against Democrat HENCE, 1T Is NOT
TRUE THAT THE main QUESTION IN MAKING APPOINTMENTS
OR ANYTHING ELSE Is, as DExoTRAr2"n
The small capitals are our own This was the
language OF the Standard of the 9Th, and we were
glad to see-it, because thought the circumstan.
ees justified it. But the Standard of the 9Th, the
very next paper tries to shift the issue, and in reply
to our remarks intimates that the question: in max
ing appointments, is, was he a Secessionist or a
Unlonlst-or, to use the language of the Standard,
conservative" or "precipitator." This was not
the question alluded by US last week, and had
not been raised by those who were grumbling about
the matter; though we think our denial will ap-
ply to one as we'll as the other The Standard
publishes list of some % prominent appoint
ments, and asks to point out a single officer in
the list who vas an undoubted Union man in the
February election aud up to the time Of Lincolns
proclamation. We are not we'll enough informed
to answer to the position of all those named in
February, but some of them were Union men then,
that is if the Union could be preserved upon hon.
orable aud safe terms for the South. AS the STAN
dard challenges to point them out, we name
Coils. w P Bynum, HI w Guion, and Chapiains
Fitzgerald and Yates, and taking the Captains and
Lieutenants into consideration (rot in the Stand
ards list) there many others who were Union
men In February; for instance there is Fowle Of
Raleigh, and Merrimon Of Ashevillc, not only ex-
treme Union men, but were violent opponents of
Governor Ellis. Aud we may say that but few
of those named by the Standard were disunionists
immediately after Lincoln's election. Such men
as Johnston, Branch, Meares, and Young, were not
precipitators; of they became disunonists,
but it not until after they were convinced that
all reasonable efforts to preserve the Union
unavaug So, allowing the Standard to change
the question, think our former position is main
tanned, that politics have not Influenced the ap-
pointing power. Some of the bitterest opponents
Gov. Ellis ever had, have been appointed to Office
by him. How many Union men can the Standard
name who have been refused appointments because
they were Union men, "eonservatives' as the
Standard calls them
We dislike to discuss these matters now, but
justice seemed to require that the charges preferred
should be refuted by some one. We believe the
editor of the Standard to be as true any one to
the interests of his State and the institutions Of the
South however much We doubt the propriety of
his course-we never assaulted or doubted his pa
riotisn-( in fact, never could help feeling much
sympathy for him, both of us having graduated in
in the same institution printing Office, and hav-
ing to Tweed our own rows" as We went)-but we
fear that he and others too ready to create
prejudical feeling towards the State administra-
ton. Now that We are all fighting against COM
mon enemy, let by cones be by-gones.