Democratic enquirer. [volume] (M'arthur, Vinton County, Ohio) 1867-1873, 1867-12-12

/,
THE SENAToRsHIp-W desire to
have and mean to have no controversy
with the Columbus Statesman, OF any
other Democratic paper in Ohio, on
the subject of United States Senator
At the same time it would be more
candid for the Statesman to lay aside
its claims to be the central organ of
the Ohio Democracy, and openly
avow itself the partisan of Judge
Thurman. ...... r..
In its issue of the 22d instant we
find the following:
"The Democratic members of the
last Legislature unanimously put him
(Judge Thurman) in nomination, and
voted for him for the United States
Senate. 1t is true the Democrats had
no majority in that body then, Why
did they thus put him in nomination
and thus vote for him? Why did they
not nominate and rote for Mr. Vdttdn-
diqham instead? Had they done SO,
that would have been putting him
"openly" before the people of the
State as ga candidate" in the late
election. The act of the last Legisla-
ture in nominating and voting for
Jugde Thurman for the United States
Senate gave the people to understand
that he was a man worthy to be
elected to the Senate, and that very
circumstance may have led many
Democratic editors to conclude that
now that we have a majority in the
incoming Legislature, and to secure
which he contributed as much as any
other man, it would be highly proper
to ratify that nomination Of the DEM
ocratic portion of the Legislature
Judge Thurman, too, has reason to
conclude that he has the right to con-
slider himself qualified to be elected
to the United States Senate inasmuch
as he received that unanimous sup
port last year in the Legislature, or is
it allowed for him to be candidate
only at such time when there is no
chance of an election?" t
Now we are authorized to answer
the question asked by the Statesman,
which we print in italics. The Dem
ocratic members Of the Legislature
two years ago, did not nominate and
vote for Mr.. Vallandigham, for this
reason: On the 9th of November,
1865, Mr.. V. received confidential
letter from q most intimate friend of
Judge Thurman, resident in Colum
bus, urging Mr.. Yallandigham to de-
cline in favor of Thurman for the
complimentary vote" for Senator
Mr.. V. answered, agreeing to do so, on
the express condition that this COM
pliment was not in any way to en-
barrass him in 1867, nor to be regard
ed as giving Thurman any advantage
in future contest. On the 18th o
November Mr.. V. received reply
from the same gentleman, (part of
which is stated to be from the Judges
Gown lips,") giving the most positive
assurance that Judge Thurman only
desired the vote as compliment "
and that if the Democrats had carried
the Legislature he would not have
been candidate, but would have SUPP
ported Mr.. ", and further, that itl
should give the judge no superior
claim in the future; and requesting
Mr.. V. to decline and "lead off" for
Thurman, 80 that his nomination
might be "unanimous;" which he
accordingly did the next day through
the columns of the Dayton Empire.
This then is the reason why the
Democratic members Of the Legisla-
ture two years ago "did not nominate
and vote for Mr. Vallandigham for
Senator" 1t was because his declina-
ton expressly in favor of Judge
Thurman was procured upon consul
tation with the Judge, by the especial
friend of the latter,-Dayton Ledger,
N0v. 26. s,. 4o.ndeT
Tur Cbil1ioothe Ad,,ort;eor favora