The weekly mountain Democrat. [volume] (Placerville, El Dorado County, Calif.) 1861-1862, 1861-08-31
MoConnelI and Secession.

AcConnSl ana secession.
The Abolition press throughout the
State have labOred Increasingly to fasten
upon the public mind the belief that the
Democratic party were in favor Of secec-
sion and that John r. Mcconnell was .
secessionist Of the most ultra stamp
This base Islander has been repealed and
refuted time and again, yet it has been
and is still reiterated with oil the brazen
effrontcry of the father Of lies himself
The Union slIders," anxious to have
others implicated In treason as deeply as
themselves, arc particularly loud and un.
bluShing in the circulation Of the mon.
strous lie. But little while ago, In their
eyes, q Union with the Slave States was
disgraccful and to be "let slide" on the
slightest prOvOcation. Now they and
none others are Union men. Their n.y.
pocrisy is too shallow TO deceive any in.
teligent man, and will not avail them.
The Democratic party of to day arc as
devoted to the Constitution and the Union
us they have been in times past in this
regard they occupy the position Of Jeffcr-
son, Madison and jackson, and whether
victorious or vanquished at the approach
ing election, will continue to strive for
their maintenance and perpetuatiOn, and
will cling to their principles with all the
tcnacity Of pure patriotism. In proof
Of what We say, We lay before our readers
the following extract from n speech made
by Mr.. Mcconnell, in Sacramento, on the
18th inst, as We find it reported in the
Sacramento Union:
~ AIN here tonight as a Democrat of
I lifelong standing. am here tonight as
the friend, the earnest and devoted friend
Of that glorious Union Of our fathers sym.
bOlized in the stars and stripes that now
float above my head. love that Union
the Union with the Constitution and
with State equality, as We have received
it ut the hands Of those who have passed
this way before us. nm here, above all,
as the advocate Of peace, Us the friend Of
those who have been widowed and orphan.
cd in this most unholy sectional strife,
and claim an attentive hearing for q
short time while disclose TO you some OF
the principal views entertained by myself
and the party which represent, upon
the great questions now dividing the two
parties. Before, however. going into the
.t,Nrn IF LIZ
meet for the sake-o repelling it, Islander
that is tlippantly vended about the streets
and dispensed through the press, through.
out the length and breadth OF the State Of
California, upon the party and the party
platform which am here to advocate, as
we'll as upon the humble person who now
addresses you. II was charged. he said,
that the Democratic party Of California
was 4 secession party, and that their plat.
form contained secession doctrines, and
that he and those with him on the ticket,
were scccssioni>tS because they endorsed
that platform. The platform adopted BY
the party in this city on the 18th If June
last was one which had been endorsed hy
every Democratic body and Democratic
leader since the organization Of the pnrtv.
The principles there embodied and in.
'iorscd were first put before the worli nv
the illu>triouS author Of the Declaration
Of Independence, Jefferson, and the illus.
trious father Of the Constitution, Madison,
and since that day the resolutions, of '9s.
as they were CALLED, had been the funda-
mental doctrine Of The Democratic party,
from which they had never Straved or
wandered. II they were seccs>ioni>ts,
then were Thomas Jefferson and James
Madison scces>ioniStS, and so was General
jackson. Van Buren,, Pierce. Levi Wood.
bury, SlaS Wright. James Buchanan, :.
\. Douglas and every other distinguished
Democrat, past or present. These doc
trincs received the endorsement If the
Cincinnati Convention Of 1886, and the
Charleston Convention Of 1860, and tho
the latter subsequently divided in two,
yet the platform was adopted and became
the platform Of each subdivision. He
might stop here in replying To the Sian.
derouS charge Of secession, but he would
60 further and explain briefly what he
conceived to be the views Of the Dcmo.
cratic party on the question If secession.
They held that there was no such thing
as the right Of secession. They held that
the Constitution did not contemplate its
own destruction, and did not contain the
seeds Of its own dissolution"