The daily phoenix. [volume] (Columbia, S.C.) 1865-1878, 1872-06-02
S. G.
Sunday Morning, June 2, 1872.
Havo Wo q Democratic Party In South
Carolfna3

Have We Democratic Party In South
Caroltnas
We stated, in previous article op.
posing che sending OF delegates from
this State to the general Democratic
Convention at Baltimore, that there was
no Democratic party in this State, and
we did not propose to have one. The
Charleston Ne,os thinks this 'bold
begging of the question" and proceeds
to show, after its fashion, that wo have
got Democratic party. or ought to have
one, because We had one some time ago.
IT people never changed their opinions,
or if we had no Indications of an altera-
tion in the sentiments Of the people of
South Carolina, the argument Of the
Ne,os would be very strong. But it does
happen that people do change their
opinions, which We hope the Ne,os will
admit, and not accuse us here, too, of
begging the question; and it does further
happen, il any faith can be put in the
press of the State and in the letters OF
our most influential citizens, that the
atrongest indications are given of gem
eral disinclination to revive the Demo-
cratic party in this State, or entrust our
further fortunes to its impotent hande.
The Ne,0s need go no further than its
own County Convention, which it does
not itself know whether to call Demo
cratic or Conservative, and finally ends
by calling it both, to have proof of our
"bold assertion" In the proceedings OF
that convention, published in the same
issue OF the Ne,cs in which its editor
pitches into rs for what he is pleased to
term our "bold begging of the Question:"
we find the very President himself ear
nestly disclaiming against any connec-
tion with the Democratic party. which
he considered as dead and buried some
time ago. The remarks OF this gentle
man, Mr.. Kinloch. are reported in the
Ne,0s as being received with applause.
Mr.. McOrady was Of the same opinion,
and openly declared himself no Demo
crat. Mr.. Steadman says, ''We do not
meet here as Democrats. There was no
dissenting voice reported, and Mr.. Boag
declared without being contradicted, that
there was but one proclaimed Democrat
in the meeting-a Mr.. Alley. Now if, as
We suppose, this Mr.. Alley is Mr.. Jack
Alley, the well-known undertaken, we
warn our contemporary that the faithful
allegiance of auch an one is very ominous
at this time. Mr.. Alley, doubtless, has
keen eye to business. and being de-
sirous to be in ut the burial, it is surely
only by way OF euphemism that. like his
illustrious prototype, Mr.. Omer, he is
persuaded to speak Of the defunot body
as "the party"
The Ne,0s says the assembling in con.
vention will prove whether or not there
is Democratic party in the State. We
submit to our contemporary, that if his
primary meeting in Charleston can be
regarded as criterion OF those in other
parts of the State, that there will be but
slim Democratic gathering at the capt.
tai. They who respond to the call OF a
Democratic Executive Committee should
be Democrats. we admit, but they will
not be in this instance; and for proof,
We point our contemporary to his own
County Convention, and bid him ponder
upon it and grow wise. There is evi.
IDENTITY no Democratic party in Charles.
ton. Even our rash contemporary will
scarcely undertake to ''go it alone" on
Mr.. Alley, who. though, doubtless,
very excellent man, is too singular to
form party, according to any ordinary
nccsptation Of the term. In its zeal to
maintain the existence OF the Democra-
tic party. the Ne0s evinces conscious
ness OF the Inconsistency of our taking
part in the Baltimore Convention, ex-
cept as Democrats. We are glad to see
this. and hope the Nsos will impress the
idea npon the Convention. 80 that there
may be clear understanding of the cha.
racter in which We propose to demand