Year: 1872

| law was based on any aci!on ol eHher wing
of the party in San Francisco. We believed
with it that primaries should have been held
in that city. We only copied the extract,
at is sameful that the supreme authority
Of the party should be thus ignored" as proof
that the Examiner recognised some higher
power in the Democratic party than its vot-
ers, which we hold to be hercsy. Tie rcsl
reason for our article was this; and we be-
icvc it should have appeared weeks earlier


We respect the ability, candor and good
faith of the Examiner, and acknowledge its
power for good or evil, and we had carefully
read its elaborate articles tending and intended
to suppress public opinion and discussion by
the press and masses of the party onsine 1ues-
ton of indorsing the Cincinnati platform and
nominees by either he State or Baltimore con-
vention; and wlile this effort was being made to
silence tie press and seal the lips of all others
tie Ecaminer was openly eXerting all its
power and influence to obtain an expression Of
the Democracy of the State against an ALI
ancc with the Liberal Republicans. In this
latter it was exercising its Legitimate right,
in the former it was both unfair and anti
Democratic. because the masses are the SUI
premc power in the party, and they must in
dicate their VIII TO their agents, and the
agents are bound to carry their expression
out to comply with the will of the majority
and be Democratic. The Examiner was
counseling that the press and The pc pie should
keep quiet and mum on this question of in
dorsing Greeley; that they should ego it
blind in sending their delegates to County,
State and National Conventions, and then
submissvely abide by whatever the blind
and uninsructed leaders might do; that is
that delegates should attempt to represent
voters without being allowed to know what
their wishes are on the most vital questions at
issue. This all Others were counscled TO do,
but it was not to apply to the actions Of that
paper. We believed the Democratic voters
were the men to decide whether they wanted
Greeley or not, and that they should clearly
indicate what their delegates should do in the
premises, and take no chances Of being sold
out. That they have done in the adoption
of the Mird resolution of the platform.


We were panied to see the Examiner,
usually so correct, occupy this abnormal and
clearly nti-Democraiic position and with the
kndest feelings called its attention to the
fact, satisfied it would at once recognize the
truth, and step within the law. Says the
Examiner:


I'm reply to the question OF the HERALD,
Who constitute the supreme authority of the
party ? we answer that according to Democratic
law, it is the National Democratic Convention


There you are in error again. The Ma
tional Convention is the mere agent of the
voters of the party and il bound by Demo
cratic law to carry out the will of its consit-
ucnts as prmarially expressed, or its action
is void. 1t is the mere creature while the
Democratic people is the creator; the SOW
ereign and supreme power that binds and
governs all its acts. To say that the creature
is supreme above the creator, does violent
violence to every previous conception of Dem
ocracy or Democratic law. The Examine,
will not say that if the Baltimore Convention
should nominate Grant, the act would come
from supreme authority and must be obcyed.
The idea is too absurd to require further no.
ticc. If we ever had any feeling OF
this matter it ceased with the very satisfac-
tory action Of our State Convention, and yet
we hold that the discussion of the above
question between papers claiming to belong
to the same party should be more frequently
engaged in, that the party may arrive at what
is correct, party law and action, and with Us
it shall ever be with the very best of motive,
and kindest of feelings.