Year: 1859

We desire 20 say few words in ltply to
the very silly article which appeared in the
Express of yesterday on the Test Makers.


with its usual alaerity in jumping to con-
clusions which are not at all sustained by
facts or reason, it imagiues that it has found
contradiction between certain remarks OF
ours on the Charleston Convention and Ger
tain other remarks which we had made pre-
yiously on the same subject. We do not ac-
cuse our neighbor of wilfully intending to
misrepresent us. No doubt he really thinks
that we have eontradeted ourself-but it is
an error of his head and not of his heart, and
therefore quite pardonable


We suggested, in efarticle, on Wednes
day, that the divided elements Of the Democ,
racy in this State ought to be reunited, and
named a test in the primary elections which
would be likely to effect it. That test was in
the shape of question to be asked of every
voter -"Will you support the nominee
of the Charleston Convention ?" The Express
says that this is contradictory of a previous
position assumed by us and quotes us as fol-
fows:


eve shall support the nominee of tho Charles
ton Convention II he be true and genuine Dam
ocrGt. Otherwise, we shall not. SO far as we are
concerned, and to the extent of the influence
which this paper may WELD, we shall submit to
no nomination which outrages the time hononor-
ed principles of the Democratic party. We have
no admiration whatever for public journal,
claiming to be Democratic which will pledge it.
ro1r l,4. 10 ot No
nominated by the Charleston or any other Con-
venton Ua0 Is not a thorough Democrat. If he
be sound Democrat then ought every Demo =
cIatic journal in the country to support him, but
ifhe be not he ought to be thrown overheard
with as little ceremony as bag Of ROTTEN pcta-
toes.


Now the above contains the expression of
a determination to support the nominee of
the Charleston Convention, if he be q true
Democrat 1t is not likely that he will be
anything else, but, should he be, we con
ceive that no honest Democratic journal
could support him. In making the test, aciU
you support tie nominee Of tie Charleston
Contention? it might be added, provided he
Be a true Democrat, but the addition would
be somewhat superfuous, for no sensible
man, after replying Eyes" to that query,
would consider himself bound to vote for a
Republican or Know Nothing if he hap
pened to be nominated by that body. He
promises to support the nominee of the Con-
vention, always with the proviso that the
Convention do not betray the trust reposed
in them by the nomination of man who is
not Democrat


We think this position sound one, and
we would like to see the Express point out
its heresy. If the Express takes an opposite
ground, it simply declares then that it will
support the nominee of the Charleston Con
vention even if he shall be an Abolitionist or
a Know Nothing. This position is too absurd,
we think, even for the Express to assume


We have fully as much confidence in the
Charleston Convention, in all probability as
the Express has, but we are not so lost to the
true dignity of public journalism as to pledge
Democratic paper to the support of man
who is no Democrat, simply because we may
be told to do so by some Convention.


We now ask the Express the question
VIII you support an Abolitionist or Know
Nothing, if he be nominated by the Charles
ton Convention To quote its own language
towards us, 1--WE want no ifs and ands, but a
plain, positive, unequivocal answer. Let us
hear from you"