Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1864-07-28
UNION COUNTY TICKET.

WE assure cur neighbor OF the BELMONT
CHRONICLE that it was not our intention, in
what we said in relatien to the Belmont
County delegates to misead the people
OF the District" We were informed that
several Of the delegates favored Mr.. Bing.
hams nomination, and would vote Tor him
in the convention; but the editor Of the
CHRONICLE says he understands the
character Of the delegates well enough 10
know that they will present but q single
candidate to the convention. " lie says also
that "the candidates will insist on such
course, &C. We hud supposed, hereto.
fore, that it was the duty of delegates to
vote in accordance with the wishes OF their
constituents; but it seems that we were
slightly mistaken. At least our friend of
the CHRONICLE claims that it ID the cnndi.
dates and not the people, over in Belmont,
who control the action of delegates to a
nominating convention. That is certainly q
strange position to tako; and il is not very
likely, We think, that tho Belmont dele.
gates will adopt it. II the people in some
half dozen townships in Belmont County
prefer MIR. Bingham ns candidate to any
other man proposed, it is the duty Of dele
gates representing such townships to give
him their support, regardless of any action
on the part Of a majority Of the delegates;
and such. we have no doubt, will be their
course. In the selection of candidate for
Congress, let there be "full and fair OK.
preston Of the popular will )" and then, be
the result what il may, let all good Union
fnen ch,eerfully acquiesce, and give the nom
inee hearty support. Il Cadiz Republican
In the CHRONICLE of July IA VIC
printed an extract from IN article in
the Cadiz Republican of the previous
week, on the Congressional Convention,
and In connection Herewith gave our
views rs to what would be the proba-
bic course OF the delegates to that con-
vention from this County, and what we
knew were the wishes of the gentle.
men who had been named as probable
candidates.
In doing so, we thought we had used
language that no one need misunder.
stand; but the above, from last week
Cadiz Republican, containing the com
ments of its editor upon what we then
said, requires us, in charity to him, to
conclude we were mistaken--for he
either misunderstands or misrepresents
1t. We regret that Mr. Iatton did not
think proper to print our article, and
let his readers see what We had said,
that they might judge of the correct.
ness OF his comments. If he had done
this, 1t would have avoided the neces-
sity Of any further discussion; but, as
he has thought proper, in his zeal for
the success Of Mr.. Bingham, to do
otherwise, We are compelled-in justice
tothe delegates, to the gentlemen named
rs candidates, to the people of Belmont
County-again to refer in the columns
OF the CaRoSIcLE TO this subject, and
we assure our readers we do it very re.
luctantly.
In the article In the Republican Of
July Z, the editor, speaking of the &c.
ton OF the Belmont Convention, said
Twenty-Five delegates we're appointed to
The Congressional Convention, which meets
10 Cambridge on the 10th Of August. They
se uainstructed. Several, we were inform.
cd. are 10 favor Of Dir. Bingham's nomioa.
ton. A majority. however. will no doab,
so for the nomination Of Belmont County
ssn--shrse at least Of whom are spoken q
as candidases, yis: Hon. Isaac Welsh, Col
Poornan sod Capt. Danford and it may
BE that the names OF other gentlemen 10 tha,
County will be presented - candidates. %
In commenting upon this, in the
CHRosIcLE Of July Ia, we said:
at Is true, dic names of several gentle
men have been mentioned as probable can
didsaes, and each one has special friend,