Daily Nashville patriot. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1860-1862, 1861-07-27
The Union Tieket---COl. VIM. III.
Polk.

u
The Union Tieket---COl. VIM. Ill.
Polk.
ETbe Nashville Bonner has been extremely
nervous since its candidate for Governor was
placed at the head of the Union ticket by tn
archbishop of East Tennessee treason, WM. e.
BRoySLow. It was delighted with the with
drawal of TRIGG, aud the idea that the supper
tiers of the Lincoln government in East Ten
nessee were willing TO support Polk, but 1t
Dad not, evidently, expected that BRowNLow
would pursue the particular course he has
deemed most polite. position" at the
head Of the Union ticket, was not part OF
the desired programme. That was load
the vicarious candidate, and his friends, would
rather have avoided. But BRowNLow is a
urecious MaIplos. He would throw his jack
al the wrong moment, and play the mischief
with his partners. This was misfortune,
fut such one as will occur when least ex-
neeted. even when the most skiliful players
are ST the table. The most subtle intrigues
sometimes fail because single point has not
Deen properly guarded; and as Burns says:
ssTne beet laid sehemea of mice and men
An gang agley-"
Who were the ''mice,n and who the "men,"
in this case, we shall not undertake TO deter
mine. IL is certain, however, the people
..su,elt mice" ito use a slang phrase)
when BsowSLow inmped into the ring.
The BQnnsr has felt it to be its duty to pub
fish day after dag, Mr.. Folks position, as
understood by IT, On the other hand, we
have regarded it oar duty to give our readers
daily his "position" at the head OF the Union
ticket. The Banner does not approve this
course of ours. 1t seems to think that Col.
po,y is not the candidate of the Union men.
In this belief the Banner is simply in error.
And We put it to our neighbOr to say can
didly whether Col. Polk would have been
candidate, if it had not been supposed he
could get the Union vote of the State? When
TRIaG was nominated he took steps, as We
have been informed, to abandon the canvass,
but 30 soon as he was assured that TRIGG
would be gotten out of the way, he changed
his determination. If Col. Polk is not the
candidate of the Union men, who is Are
not the Union men of East Tennessee sup
Dortinp him. at the head OF their ticket
Are not the Union men OF Fentress, county
in which several Lincoln companies have been
formed, supporting him? Are not the Union
men of Macon, some of whom have arms in
,bsir houses which have been Struggled into
.he State by agents OF Mr.. Lincoln, support
,np bim7 Are not the Union men Of Wayne,
and Hardin, and Weakley, and of every 9th
Their county in the State, supporting him ?
Go around the city of Nashville, and hunt up
every man who favors the Union, and hopes
10 see the star spaBgled banner flying over
Us again, and you will find them supporting
Por.E. We have heard of one man who de-
clares that HARRIS, ZoLLIcoPgER, PILLOW,
and the editor of the PATRIOT, ought to be
hing. and he shouts HErrah for Polk ~
yVithout the votes of these enemies of Ten
nessee- these traitors to Southern Indepen-
dence. these panderers to the ubiquitous gov
eminent of Mr.. LINCOLN, Col. Polk would
scarcely get votes enough in the State to
convince posterity that he was really can
didate. But the Banner thinks We do Col.
Polk injustice by refusing to publish his pos
ition, as given in that paper. Ii this were
true (which it Is notJ, the Banner has no right
to complain. 1t has persistently charged
that Governor HARRIS, In bis appointments,
nss Disseminated in favor Of his partisan
friends. We respectfully asked the Banner
20 take up the list OF appointments, and
classify them, s1d substantiate the charges.
In Aid not do this; but continued to reiterate
the charge. We published list, which show
ed that, according to the latest party test,
Governor HARRIs had really appointed ma
iority of his political opponents to office
had Disseminated, against bis partizan
friends. If he had Disseminated at all.
The Banner egaded the force OF these facts,
by seeking to substitute the canvass of Feb
ruar7 between the Union men and Secession
lists az the standard of comparison. We ae-
cepted the issue and respectfully asked the
Banner to publish the names, classified ac-
cording TO its chosen standard. 1t has not
done 60. If It believed the charge. 1t should
have msnfully met the Issue. Having failed
10 do Gov. HARRIS the justice even to make
80 attempt to prove its charge, the Banner
mad no right to ask Us TO do justice to its
candidate.
Now, as regards the charge that We have
refused to publish the Balner's version of Col.
PoLk's position. Is this so. The Banner has fire.
quently repeated the charge. 1t ought to have
known whether ii was doing US justice or not /;
whether it was warranted Ia endeavoring
to impress upon the public mind the belief
tbs. we were purposely doing Col. Polk an
injury. But the Bmnr does not seem TO
have given itself any trouble to ascertain the
facts. 1t could hunt our local columns for
praises Of Col. Polk; but in its researches
overlooked the fact that we had, uussked,
laid before our readers its exposition OF his
position. We did so on the 9th day Of July.
IS follows
From the Nashville Patriot July 9th
Col. PoIkss Position.
The Banner gives Col. PoIKs position as
follows
He voted on the sih of June for SEPARA-
rIos and Representations. He is in favor of
the adoption of the Permanent Constitution
Of the Confederate States by the people of
Tennessee, on the LIST Thursday in August
next. He is for the most vigorous and effec-
tive prosecution of the war for Southern In
dependence, and opposed TO any compromise
or settlement short of the acknowledgment
of our Independence.
Thus, It appears that instead of refusing to
oubIish the Banaers statement of Col. PoIE's
nositiou. We gave him the benfit Of il in
o,r johanna prornptly;: and our neiOh-