Litchfield enquirer., 1863-03-12
The Democratic Platform. No.

To the Edttor of file Enguirer:
 This subject affords so much room for criti eism and study, that We propose to devote sev- eral articles to its discussion. According to custom, the Democracy of the State have laid down their platform for the present canvass, in series of resolutions emanating from their State Convention. No one can plead hcreaf ter ignorance of their position and designs for with effrontery unequalled they have plain
 ly avowed their traitsrous principles, and dare appeal to the hoaest. voters of Connecticut to endorse them. Who could have imagined that such a disgrace could have fallen upon our State? It is draught composed of the very dregs of the cup of degradation. Even their coadjutors in other loyal States stand aghast at their cffronteery, and wisely hesitate ts up. hold them in it.
 The resolutions are skillfully drawn, and bear upon their face evidences of great care and deep consultation, among the leaders of the party, in their preparation. The Committee of the Convention no more wrote those reso, lutions than they wrote the Constitution, and we doubt, if some ot them any more con,prc- hendcd their full significance. They can find no excuse. therefore, in the enthusiasm which might possibly hold sway in anch gathering but must be accepted as the cool, deliberate and careful statement of the position and ds- signs of the Democratic leaders. As such we shall regard them. Thank Heaven, it is still in the power of the people to repudiate these loa,hsome doctrines, and to assign their au, thors to merited contempt. Glance at the res. olutions, and see to what their teachings must of necessity lead us. The preamble. af,er re. itsrating tie undisputcd right of the people, % re-assert, from time to time their principles, And review the action sf their servants, thus pro ceeds :-'t And whereas the present Adn inis | tration has for nearly two years been in armed collision with one third of the States compos l ing the Confedaracy.'' Two false inferences arc implied in the only possible construction of this language. The first is, that it is the Administration in it's partisan character, and l not as the exponent and defender of the na
 tional authority, that is in armed collision with . part of its lawful subjects. This is so falst | as to need no denial. The issue was not ons ! sought by the Administration, but one Joreec upon it, in it's capacity, as the embodiment .
 the natienal life and authority, and, which i
 was not base enough, like it's ssryile predeces I saE, to attempt to sYade. As for the otherin
 ference, the fact of An armed collision witt
 sonseshing. is undeniable ]; but is it with . DOT \ ton ossthe States composing the Confedersey
 and in view of that fact, entitled to all th' rights and immnnities of States loyal to tn I Union? Ia it an armed collision arising iron I the maladminissration of the government ts
 ward States entitled to all the privileges of th
 ConstitutiOli Sueh is tho only s4nstssctiol that the hasaage Hill bear. II layi u ono d upon the Administziion the whols hl1me q n armed colihion. already determined upos ! Nhen it cane into existence, rather than ppol
 fhe States, which have dissolved, 70 fAs as i thsM lay the power, sll connection rish th