Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1870-11-24


The Banner and Memphis 4Vaianche
aTe evidently in very bsd humor at the
result OF the Congressional race in this
District 1t is perhaps not sstonish-
ing as their earnest exhort-
70 the people to vote the "inde-
pendent ticket were severely disre-
garded. Their candidate, with sll of his
honors thick upon him, could not COM
msnd one-fifth of the votes cast. he
was beaten over twenty-three hundred
votes by the Radical nominee, and over
fortysthree hundred votes blythe nomi-
nee of the Democracy. This say these
cotemporaries, was accomplished by the
party lash. Do they assert that the peo-
pie of this district are beings who can be
dashed to the polls like dumb, driven cat
tleG Are they intending 70 insinuate that
there is truth in the doctrine of Horace
Maynard, that the people as q class are
"human cattle % a,n 3ia1 4
The Banner says:
We made no personal wsr upon the
nominee of the District Convention, for
whom we entertained and expressed the
kindliest feelings. But we opposed his
election, or rather preferred the election
of his Conservative competitor for OBJ
vious reasons, just as the National Demo
cratic Executive Committee would have
preferred, aud seventy-five Senators and
Congressman with that Committee hsd
pre-advised, without any reference TO in
dividual or convention preferences.
From this and former articles of the
Bdsmer, its position, as we understand 1t,
is, that it made no personal war on Col
Golladay, but opposed him because it be-
lieved that if elected and Col. Prosser
should receive the next highest vote, the
Radical candidate would be permitted to
take the seat, because the former, although
his disabilities had been removed by Con
gress, could not take the iron-clad oath.
Does not that argument apply with equal
q lHlt 4
force 70 Bright, Whirthorne and Caldwell,
the Democrats elected from the 4th, 9th
and 9TH DISTRICTS
If Prosser be permitted to take the seat
from this district, viii not Mullins be sd.
mitted from the fourth, Cypert from the
sixth and Norman from the seventh.
Again: would it not have been better for
the ticket throughout the State that the
Banners opposition to Col. Golladay
should have been personals Then its
effect would have been limited TO this
district. But that opposition being based
upon grounds which applied with equal
force to three other Democratic candi-
dates must to the extent of the circula-
ton and influence of the Bonner had a
dampening and demoralizing effect
throughout the State and especially in those
four large districts where the candidates
objected to were running. It was an
admission which could well be used against
the party with effectiveness by Wisenel
and Butler and Maynard.
Col. Peyten announced himself an
Independent candidate against the nomi.
nee of the Convention, not against Col.
Golladay. If Col Turner had been
nominated, the Banner would have OPP
posed him on the same grounds that it
opposed Col. Golladsy.
The largest Congressional Convention
which ever assembled in this district,
composed of delegates of the highest
responsibility from every county in the
district, nominated Col Golladay by a
two-thirds vote and subsequently made
that nomination unanimous. The people
ratified the nomination by majority of
two thousand over the Radical nominee,
and over forty-three hundred over the
Independent candidate, and thus preserved
the integrity of the party.