The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1871-11-16
DIGNITY on Stills.

10 the F"ytntan OF the previous week, with
out positively calling the name Of this paper.
We understand this namby PANTY game Der
tectly. We have had to deal with it before.
But we do not intend that the Spectator shall
escape such criticism as it justly deserves, by
reason of its assumption of dignity that fits
ungracefully, and an attachmen MT to the Con-
servative organization, which is so hollow and
Pecksniffian that the most superficial examin-
alton will detect its insincerity.
We are we'll aware that its sickly and dis
jointed homiy about opposition to the Con
sentative plan was intended for this paper,
and, further, we are acquainted with the fact
that the plan adopted by the Convention at
Richmond, was defeated, mainly, by the at
tacks Of this paper upon that feature of it
which required an enrolment of Conservative
voters, and which, if it had been adopted,
would have proved fatal to any nomination
Convention might have made. When it was
asserted on our streets that those who did not
enroll would be considered Radicals, we de-
termned to meet the assertion by an appeal
to the Conservative voters of the county, and
let them say whether, in Township, where
there might be one hundred voters attending
primary meeting, twenty, who had enrolled,
should have the power Of appointing dele
gates, to the exclusion Of the eighty who
had not enrolled. Our objection was sus
tanned throughout the county; the enrolling
feature was repudiated, and consequently a
full and fair delegation was sent to tho coun.
ty Convention When we found that the
township meetings had been fully attended
and that the delegates had been fairly appoint
ed, we determined to go into the Convention
and abide its decision. We have no conceal
ments to make as to our personal preference
for the position of Senator, especially. We
were openly and avowedly the friend of Judge
Cochran for that Office. We worked in the
primary meetings and the Convention for his
nomination, and had the pleasure ofannouuc-
ing his success. We did this, because we
honestly believed he would be one of the
most useful men to the State and the county
we could send to the Legislature He was
not only nominated, but triumphantly elect
| ed, as were the other nominees but not by
any efforts or support extended to them by
the immaculate friend of Conventions, who
stands on his lettering stills of dignity, and
directs the dostinies of the ,Staunton ,Specto.
tor. Not only did the Spectator not give a
hearty and earnest support to the nominees
Of the Convention, but absolutely charged
ten dollars for a communication written by a
friend of Judge Cochran, the nominee Of the
Convention, commencing him to the suffrages
Of the people. This was in harmony, how
ever, with its course towards the nominee Of
the Congressional Convention at Harrison
burg. Notwithstanding its blatant palaver
about the necessity for Congressional Con-
vention, when that policy was determined up-
on, and the result was the defeat of its friends
it refused its support to the nominee, and
charged the regular advertising rates for ev-
cry line. either as communication or editorial
that appeared in its columns in support of
the recognized representative Of the party, as
indicated by Convention action. Its pain
and bounden duty, as a Conservative news
paper, receiving its patronage from the Con-
serva.ive masses, was to give an active sup
port to the regular nominees, whether they
were its personal choice or not. And yet in
the face of this damaging record, the Specta
tor has the efrontery to publish in its edito-
rial columns the following pitiful soliloquy.
as to the line Of duty proper to be adopted in
party contests:
Those who advocated the holding ofthe convention
without regard to the nomination of any particu-
lar individuals, but because it was complying with
the organization of the Conservative party, de-
serve credit Those, on the contrary, if any, who
favored the holding of the convention simply be-
cause they considered it the means of securing
the nominations of particular individuals, or OBJ
posed it because they feared that particular indi.
viduals would not get the nomination, deserve not
credit, but apprehension, for they subordinated
the organization and interests of the party to III
dividual preferences.
Those who supported the nominees of the con-
yenilon it they were such, simply because they
happened to be their personal choice, deserve
but little if any, credit. Those, on the contrary,
who supported them, not because of personal
preference, but from of party or patriotic
duty, deserve much credit, for they performed
virtuous act
Very we'll. Now did the Spectator from
patriotic or any other kind of duty, give an
earnest support to the Convention nominees
Can any one place his finger on single SEN
tence or paragraph in the editorial columns
of that wonderfully disinterested journal
where it frankly and earnest fly advocated the
election of the nominees? AS we stated last
week, its course was more damaging to the
success Of the regular ticket, than if it had
adopted an avowed line Of antagonism to it.
It not only did not aid in the election of the
nominees, through its editorial columns, but
it admitted communication signed Tax-Pay-
err defaming the entire ticket, by implication
and, from first to last, gave out such uncer
Jain notes, as to make it difficult to deter
nine where precisely it stood