Saint Mary's beacon. [volume] (Leonard Town, Md.) 1867-1983, 1871-08-17
To THE DEMOCRATS OF 81. IA
RVS COUNTY.

WIN ao sPofoSSs@ O'W W" sTtsS8ss"c
again befnse you. in further defence ofths
action Of the Democratic Central Coumitses
Of the county, and with promise to b
% brief n the circumstances VIII allow.
proceed at once 10 notice the card Of Col.
J. Parrsn Crane in the Beacon Of the f0th
instant.
While I iisclaim any intentional jisco'r-
tesy or unkindness Of feeling towards any
Of the opposition candidates. in the defence
Of the action of the Central Committee oi
the 3rd instant. claim the right. and be-
lieve II duty to deal in plain WORKS. and
eall things By their right names. This
hare doue. aud no mere. The occasion
plaiuness Of speech, and the
provncation justified its use.
The Committee with conscience void
If ogence towards any. looking to the near.
IL evenly balanced voters Of the two 20.
litical parties of the county. and looking
too. TO the more perfect organization and
surer success Of the Democratic party. q,
paramount to all other questions. issue.
and considerations. gave the notice fol
Primary Elections. after having made due
inquiry 10 10 the views Of Tie Democratic
party. on the subject Of nominations -
They had satisfied themselves by inquiry
that large majority Of said PARTY favored
nominations for all Offices TO be filed, and
gave the notice accordingly. knowing thai
the Convention when assembled. would
not be 10 stupid - to regard the call O
the Committee as " Sherif-s writ. OF
Courts mandate. but would reflect the sen
timents Of their constituents. In their &C.
ton a Convention. They were aware
that there was some opposition to nomina'
tons, sud recognized II 80 plainly in their
call. that It repaired no Solomon to make
the discovery. The opposition appeared
to be more limited in numbers. than pra.
dent in zeal. A very few oppositionis,,
to any plan Of organisation. can make much
ado, on very small grounds. as was made
after the call Of the Convention
was made,-and still more manifest, after
q failure on the part Of certain candidates
10 get the nominations they sought. Aud
this (the failure of these candidatcs) is all
the offending of the Committee. They
these failing candida:es) must have some
pretext for their inconsistency and false
position. Hence their assault upon the
It was better war tactics to
asssail the Committee. and incur the ac-
i've opposition Of its three members. than
10 assail the Convention and incur the ac-
i've opposition of its sixty members. This
IS prudent. but nevertheless. very bare
faced strategy. But drowning men catch
1t straws, and it is only in such extremi-
~, that the slightest excuse can be made
for their weakness.
1T has been time out Of mind" (says
Col. Crane) 1.-THE usage Of the Democratic
party here. to nominate by mass meet
ings." Hence We infer he is in favor Of
that mode Of making nominations now. il
in favor Of any. As he was but child
when Democratic nominations were made
in this way, he may be ignorant Of the
under which this mode of
nomination was practiced in opposition to
Wing nominations by Conventions. This
vas the general practice of minority par
ties, here and elsewhere. as It afforded the
candidates thus put in the field, then, as
now. a better opportunity Of playing the
parts Of demagogues in canvassing for
votes. by making appeals to tue prejudi-
,cs Of voters. aud stirring up discord in
The ranks of the dominant party. by charg-
ng that their nominations were made Gust
Is charged now by "cliques" and "rings."
BY resort to party tricks" and q" foul
wrongs" and did not reflect the choice of
heir party. In this way. they sought to
make inrosds, (and sometimes with sue
'css. y upon the dominant party. In this
way only. Can the present opposition can
lidates hope to be elected. with the addi-
ion of the vote Of the minority party Of
he county.
But how would mass-meeting nomina-
ions accord with the good sense of the
dominant party now? How would the
emote Districts like nominations to be
made at Leonardtown. where there would
be larger attendance from Leou-
rdtown district than from all the other
districts together? How ridiculous -
What an absurdity! But just such frivo-
Gus prctexts as these, are always seized
lpon to bolster up the weak claims Of dis
candidates. They represent
hat enormous grievances have been in
|icted upon the Democratic party. by the
Convention. and they have
come forward TO redress
hose grievances. Pure, disinterested aud
they SGT themselves up as will
ing sacrifices upon the altar of their coun-
rvs wrongs. and solicit your votes to COM
,ensate for the offering. that they may be
what? Martyrs in the cause Of right !?
10! Recipients of honors and emolu-
neuts. and that. too. at tho risk Of break
ng down the asccndency Of the Democrat
c party in the county. and diminishing
he vote Of the State candidates.
II 10 deemed unnecessary 20 notice in
letail. the objections urged against the
lction Of the Central Committee, aud this
.humbug Of Convention" (as elegantly
'syled BY Col. Crane). The common sense
II all impartial minds will readily refutc
his queralous objections and weak falla-
nos. without any suggestions from the
They viii readily see the
,nimn that prompted these objections
md fsllacies. and will 20 readily discredis
heir soundness.
Our neighbors Prince Georges and
Anne Arundel counties have nominated
Ios all Offices. political and local. Charles
md other counties viii do the same thiag.
And what masters is whether the call Of
The Comnittee was pablished on the 25,h
1t May. or the 25th Of some ether mouth |!
What matters il whether the call was
made for MI nominations. or only for Del
rgascs TO the State Convention The