The Daily state journal. [volume] (Alexandria, Va.) 1868-1874, 1873-09-17

doctrines of Union and loyalty in 1865
the Conservatives changed to those Of Sc
cesslon and misrepresentation in 1868
Calling themselves Conservatives in Vir
ginia, they send delegates to be ranked
and accepted as Democrats in New York
Dates change, and they change with them
skies change, and they change with the
skies-these models Of consistency.
We know what cnsued in 1868. With
Colonel Withers as their candidate for
governor, they waged violent warfare
upon every principle and sentiment which
had been implied in their oaths of ale.
glance, taken in 1865. But when the vote
came on to be given in 1869,
they found, then, what they
are beginning to find no,c, that the people
would not join them in the gross breach OF
faith they were committing towards their
| oath of allegiance. In the spring of 1860
they found that the people would not join
them in voting down the state constitution
which the Republican party had framed,
nor aid them in preventing the re-admission
of Virginia into the Union. In this strait.
what did this party of most punctilious
consistency do? Did it push on its white.
mans movement, and stand fast to its se-
CCooiOit PtatlOitI VI lCOf dDu lCOo NNO
it changed again. 1t dismissed Colonel
Withers, and took up carpet-bagger as
candidate for governors circumstance
which explains why the Colonel has had car
pet-bagger so badly on the brain ever since.
The carpet-bag governor which the party.
now so consistently denouncing carpet
baggers, then made its candidate was
Gilbert 9. Walker Its platform was
equally remarkable. The white mans
party of 1868 turned complete somer-
sault, and adopted, in the following
words. -7T- = s.,
THE WALKER PLATFORM OF 1860:
We believe that large mariority of
the intelligent and rejecting people of
Virginia, who have a permanent interest in
the prosperity Of the state, are becoming
convinced that soisdom and sound policv
alike demand that they shall accept and
carry out, in good faith, the measures pro-
posed by Congress for the Reconstruction of
the southern states, and are desirous of
adopting the great principles enuncia-
ted by the sRepublican party of the
country"
1t would require Ross telescope to dis
cover the smallest speck of state-riqhts-ism
and achite-man's-party-is in this platform.
What did Governor Walker himself saw of
his movement and his platform in his
opening speech of the campaign of 1869.
delivered in Richmond7 He said
I" Fellow-citizens the men who have
placed me in nomination are we'll
known to you and to the people of this
state. They are men of substantial charac-
ter, men Of broad and catholic views and |
liberal principles. They are Republicans
all-ycs, Grant administration Republicans,
and so am I.
There is but one road which YOU and / |
can travel. We must execute the recon-
struction laws of Congress promptly and in |
good faith.''
These words were true, and our consis-
tency-party not only supported Walker
Tor governor, but Hunnicutt for Congress,
both carpet-baggers OF the genuine type.
One Of the objects of the Walker move
ment was to secure the adoption of our
present state constitution. The Conserva-
tives made its adoption as it now stands
their leading object. The two leading
clauses in that constitution, stand |
ing out of it like the Peaks of Otter from
the landscape, were the following:
II. That this state shall ever remain
member of the United States of America,
and that the people thereof are part Of
the American nation, and that all attempts,
from whatever source or upon whatever
pretext, to dissolve said Union or to sever
said nation, are unauthorized, and ought |
to be resisted with the whole power Of the |
state.v
''2. That the constitution of the United
States and the laws Of Congress passed in
pursuance thereof, constitute the supreme
law OF the land, to which paramount alle-
glance and obedience are due from every
citizen, anything in the constitution,
ordinances, or laws of any state to the
contrary Notwithstanding"
Could there be more complete repudia-
lion OF state-rights politics than is here
made The vote of the people on these
articles Conservatives joining in the vote)
was 2l0, ,55S for and only 9, 1856 against them.
Was not here a change of front I? These
articles OF our state constitution embody in
words what was implied in the tenor of
he oath of allegiance which we all took in
1865. was consistent in voting for these
lrticles. Were the Conservatives They
cere consistent with reference to their
,aths of allegiance, but were they so with
eference to their platforms of 1867 and
8GS? When Zenith and Nadir come to-
,ether, then can these platforms be recon-
,iled with the votes of the Conservatives
or the above two articles, given in 1869,
md their Oaths taken in 1866. We pass
IN to the winter of 1870, when this party
IF "Grant Administration Republicans
vent to Washington to secure the admis-
lion ofthe state into the Union. It's repre-
there did a'great dealof DIRT eating
IN the occasion. They were wonderfully
'roluse of pledges of good behavior, which
lobody exacted of them, but which they
ave with submissiveness which was re-
reshing' to those who had heard their
antlng on the stump against the ,
Underwood constitution in 1868.
speaker Zeph Turner at the head of CONF
nittee from the Virginia legislature signed.
ealed and delivered written pledge on
heir behalf 1t concerned the state CON
titution against which they had made al
most as abusive a campaign in 1868 as they
ire now making against me. 1t contained
hese words, wonderfully consistent with
hose of their party in 1868 |:
PLEDGE OF FUTURE
GOOD BEHAvIoR. IN 1870.
,@Haying complied, as we intended to do.
md believe we have done, with every re.
luirement Of the law; and. by our conduct
n the immediate past, given the highest
md most solemn assurances of our future
lctl0n, and because H qc0uld promote epeyU