Newspaper Page Text
' tyrifirr .J bitijUi ,j
ft- t: >:J - hovef-oh j
<y-' ; .J<',«*vil\ t»-0 #t*:i
■ hfewCigj’, i
ROME, GrA., THURSDAY MORNING, AUGUST 28, 1851.
THE ROME COURIER
HID U6HED EVERY" TllUltSDXY MOUNIo
BY A. IS. EDDLE9IAH,
‘"'mils'.
Two Dou.*n» pet ntm'tm, il paid in mfcance s
Twe Dollars ami Fifty Cents If paid within six
months > or Threo Dollars at the end of the year.
Ralsi al AiTsrtlilttKi
Lvost. AnvKiTtsKHSNTS will ho inserted with
strict attention to the requirements of tho law, at
tbs following rates: .
Font Months Notice, ...
Notice to Debtors and Creditors, •»
Sale ol Personal Property, by Execu
tors, Administrators, Aso.
8nlcs of Land or Negroes, BO days,
fit no
.1 23
3 25
. 5 <10
per square; 9 _ „
Letters of Citation, • • 2 75
Notice for Letters of Dlstnlssion, • ‘150
Candidates announcing tlieir nmn6s,-will bo
charged #3 00, Which will be reqtfired In advance.
Hasbsnds advertising their wives, will lio chaigod
S3 00, whloh-must always bo paid In advance.
All,otlior«dvertisctnents will bo Inserted at One
Dollar per equate. of twoTvif^Incs or less, for tho
first, and Fifty Cents, for each subsequent Insor
, * < Llbcral deductions will bs made In favor of those
who advertise bv the year,
BUSINESS CAKES.
B. W. ROSS,
ftENTlST.
Rome, Georgia Office over N. J. Ombcrg's
Clothing Store.
January Iff, 1851.
F&AHCiB *. ALLEN,
WHM.KSAI.E AND RETAIL
Dealer in Staple and Dancy
DRY GOODS AND GROCDRIES.
Receives now goods every week.
Roino.C*., January 3. 1851.
LIN & BRANTLY.
WAXE-HOUSE, COMMISSION ft PRODUCE
MERCHANTS,
Atlanta, Ga.
^Liberal advances made on any article
In Stole.
Nov. 28.1853. ly
A. D. KINO Ac CO.
C'OTTO VOIN MANUFACTURERS
Rome, Georgia.
May 9.1830.
AM-tXAS'DHIt A TR AJWKIEl.t,.
ATTORNEYS AT IAW,
ROHR. GA
Nov.98. 1850. ly.
aoaAS hasdshak. I ( oiuatai ». Hamilton.
HAMILTON Jt HARDEMAN,
Factors & Oim aisib i Mire’mts,
8AVAXXAH, GEORGIA
Oci. a, 1850, 1 12in
URIELS* W. HAMILTON. H THOMAS HASDSHaN
HARDEMAN 4c HAMILTON,
Warehouse & Commission Merchants
*(AC(W, OEORqfA'
p<!». 3, is;;, t 12m.
PATTON 0 HATTON,
ATTORNEYS AT LAW,
Rome, Geoigia.
WILL Practice in all the Counties'of the Chero
ft.ee Circuit 48 Sept. 5, 1890.
A M. PATTON. J. P. PATTON.
W. V. WILKINS.
ATTORNEY AT LAW,
Rums, Georgia.
{larsaTo
Hon. n r. pouter, charleston, s. e. f or
AT CAVK SPUING, Gn.
Hon \f. if,IfWflKUWOOP,' RO.MK, GA.
lion. WILLIAM HAZARD, DECATUR, GA.
July IS, IS.*»0 41 ly
a. W. HEAL L{
DRAPER AND TAILOR,
Broad Street Rome, Ga.
^October 10, IS.10.
" J. D. DIDKERHON,
DRUGGIST—ROME, GEORGIA.
WHOLUAI.S AND RSTAIL DKAl.RH IN
iniuos, Medicines, paints, oils, dye-
r STUFFS, PE11FUMERY, lea.
October 10, 1830 Broad Street.
COULTER ft C0LLIR.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW,
Rome, Georgia.
Feb. 1,1851.
HOLLAND HOUSE,
' ATLANTA, GEORGIA-
rjVHS Lntge and Now Brick Hold, near llio Rm
A Hoad-Depot, if now opened. It will be kept in
euch etylc that visitors will not forget ta stop ag.iin.
Pnuerrrrcrs on tiro ears will liava moio than ample
" time to partake of tho good meals always in rcadi-
- qu-ss at the arrival of each train. Persona visiting the
City,nnd stopping at the Holland House, can got in
formation aud auistanco in business; arid pubs off
their leisure hours in amusements connected with tire
House T c Post Office, Hank Agoncy, Brokers and
pther Important offices will be In rite Holland House.
Reference—Any one who Iras or may slop one time.
” A. Rt KELLAM, Proprietor.
WM-11- llNltfiRWOODk J. W.1I. UNDERWOOD.
WILL rRAC’I ICE LAW
TN ail tire Counties of the Cherokee Circuit, (ex
A cept Dude). They will both personally attend all
,ho Courts. J. W. H. UNDERWOOD will attend
the Courts of Jnckeon and Habersham counties of the
Western. Circuit. Both will attend the sessions ofthe
SUPREME COURT at Cassville and Gainesville.—
All business -nttusted ta them will he promptly and
fafihfrilly attended to.
OFFICE next door to Iloopsr k Mitoltoll, “Buena
Vista House,” Romo, On., at which place one or both
will stwnys bo found, exrcpt absent on professions
business.
Jan .23, 1851
NEW COTTON GINS
AT HOME, GA.
•M oTW,THSTANDING oiirSh °i’ ll “’<»*n dcs
■Fn troyed twice within the last two years, onoo by
water and onco by fire, we are agaiti manufacturihg
pur superior Cotton Gina, nnd have prepared ourselve
I to fill any amount of ordera with w/licit vy« may bp
j favored. We are not making Premium Gins, or Wa
ter Box Gins, nor do we claim all the experience that
L hne'been acquired in tho art of Gin making, but vyq
without boasting, toy thof we grp willing (o
_r our Gins oldoby side with nqy random tt^e Uni-
i 8ta»e3 at the same price, undcoiripurequol.tyaud
t'ty Of Vinf gjnmed per day dag with diem. ^
For the Courier,
TO THE DEMOCRATIC VOTERS OF THE
FIFTH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT.
My only apology in addressing you on the
political questions that now agitates and di
vides the country, is, that I nm n citizen of
the same section of the State and identified
in interest and in teeling with a largo majori
ty of the people. 1 atn a native Corn Geor
gian, and my ancestors were also born
and raised, end have always lived in this
State j and whether good or ill fortune
should betide the proud Empire State of the
South, my destiny nnd that of my children,
indissolubly connected with it. Before 1
grow up to man’s estate, I embraced tho
political attachments of my father for John
Olork. My firaf votejwos cost In 1832, for
that more thau Roman incourage and wis
dom Gen. Andrew Jackson who was at
that time a candidate for re-election as Pre
sident of the United Stales. The party
with whom 1 acted were then known as the
Union party, and we opposed the nullifica
tion'party and its principles as openly pro
claimed in South Carolina, and as secretly
sustained in Georgia, by Gen. Jacksons op
ponents under the name of the State Rights
party. This was the first political contest
with which I was personally connected, and
my principles then espoused, has shaped my
political course, and must control my des
tiny—what.was then the question before the
people which divided them into parties in
Georgia ? South Caroliua and the Southern
Stales generally declared that the Tariff act
of 1828 was unjust, unequal, unconstitution
al and oppressive and if submitted to would
ultimately make the Southern people "hew
ers of wood and drawer* of water” to the
manufacturers of the Northern nnd Eastern
sectious of the Union. South Caroljna had
the same interest in this question with the
other Southern Slates, but not one particle
more. Vet, she voluntered her services un
der the lead of John C. Calhoun to vindi
cate the wrongs oftlie whole South by threat-
nine to resist the execution within hei
limits of a law passed by the authority of
Congress. A convention of the people of
South Carolina, was called, and that Cele
brated Ordinance was passed, declaring that
South Carolina, would resist _ the Execution
of the Tariff law within her limits, end if the
General Government attempted to enforce
the law against the ordinance of the State of
South Carolina, that sbo had. the right to se
cede from the Union, and she declared that
she would exercise that Right.
General Jackson addressed to Congress a
special message, giving them full information
os to the'position assumcdjby the StateofSouth
Carolina, and iq the strongest and most em-
f ibatic language denied her right to resist a
aw of Congress, within her limits and remain
a momberoflhe Federal Union, and with
equal candor end firmness denied her right
to secede at pleasure from the . Union, nnd
concluded his message by asking Congress,
to pass a law, conferring bn him the authori
ty to resist either of these attempts on the
part of South Carolina. The nuilifiers and
Slate Rights parties in South Carolina and
Georgia with great unanimity maintained
tho positions assumed hy South' Carolina in
her ordinnree, while the Union party who
were the friends and supporters of General
Jackson and the principles and measures Of
his administration, with equal unanimity ad
vocated tho position assumed by him in his
several messages to Congress. The Union
men of that day were denounced by their
Opponents qs Federalists, consolidationists
andsubmissionists, and the gallant old hero
who wasthe loader of the Union men in that
contest, w as denounced also as a despot, and
tyrant, who was striving for supreme power,
and would not be satisfied until he was made
Dictator This contest was loss than twenty
years ago, and I leel assured that there still
lives a host of old Union men in this section
of the Stale who framed their political prin
ciple in the school of Andrew Jackson, nnd
contended with equal candor and sincerity
against the right of a Stnte to nullify a law
of Congress within its limits, and the consti
tutional Right of any State at pleasure, or
when it shqil suit her interest or convenience
to say so, to secede from tho Union,
Parties in Gporgiq continued to be divid
ed on these principles and under these names,
until the year 1840, when the two parties
were re-organized upon new issues and they
each assumed for themselves new names.—
The Union party took the name of the Dem
ocratic Republican parly, and the old States
Rights party assuinpd the namp of Whigs.—
Most ot the old Union men, enrolled them
selves in the ranks of democracy. Some of
the leading, nnd most distinguished individu
als of the old Stqtes Rights organization, re
fused to go into an alliance with the national
whig party, and they too united with the
national democratic party. You cannot fail
to remember, that it was at this period ot
time the old Union men became aasqciqted
with Colquitt, Cooppr, and Black, Sebourn
Jones, John A. Jones, Henry G. Lamar, John
H. Howard, Hugh A. Haralson, and a host
of others who have sinoe aspired to lead and
control public sentiment in thp demo
cratic party, by editing newspapers, and vol
unteering at all limes when it was necessary
to send delegates to a party convention,
whether far the State at large or only tor
the Congressional district where they hap
pened to have their residence. These men
on all occasions proclaimed the iaetthat they
were nuilifiers and had not changed a single
political principle, much to the annoyaricp
qf many old Union men. But they were
their force* from Maine to Louisiana. Thev that the agents appointed by the law of 1793,
were divided on tho measures which each
tqlprated because the issues that formerly
divided the Union and nullification partips
were regarded, os obsolete. And we had
npw issues then upon which thp people of
Georgia were divided—and for the support
of which the two great national political par
ties, whigund democratic, were marshalling
thought best calculated to promote the in
terest, prosperity, and happiness of the peo
ple of the United States. The whig party,
advocated the establishment of a national
Bank, the distribution of the proceeds af the
sales of the public lands, nmoftg the States,
the improvement of Rivers and hnrhours by
the General Government, and the duties
upon foreign imports so adjusted ns to afford
sufficient revenue to support the Govern
ment, and at the same time with such dis
criminations as to afford incidental protection
to domestic manufactures. The democratic
n was against a national Bank, and in
of the Independent Treasury. The
majority of the democratic party in the Un
ion' were opposed ft n system of Internal
improvements by the General Government,
but caifdorcpmpels me to say that on this
measure the two political oarties were di
vided among themselves, fffid democrats and
whigs supported Internal improvements side
by side in certain locations or sections of the
Union and opposed them in others. The
democrats were opposed to the distribution
of the proceeds of the sales of the public
lands among the States, they believed tftut
it ought to go to defray the'necessary expenses
ot the Federal Government, and dimmish to
that extent the necessity of raising revenue
for the support of the General Government,
by duties on imports. And they were for
the lowest rate of duty that would raise suf
ficient amount of revenue for the support of
the Government economically administered,
and they were against discriminations in fa
vor of domestic manufactures. But, it is
likewise due to truth and candor to say that
in the States of Pennsylvania, and New Jer
sey, and in some ol the Eastern States, the
democrats acted upon the whig rather than
the democratic principles in regard to this
measure. These were the measures that
divided the two great parties in the Union
from 1840, until the meeting of the Legisla
ture of Georgia in 1849 and 1860. At that
time the old issues that merely affected (he
administration of the General Government,
were either regarded as “ obsolete ideas,”
or consigned to oblivion as unimportant com
pared with the paramount question then rais
ed for the first time in the State of Georgia.
At the conclusion of peace with Mexico, the
-United States acquired a large and extensive
tract of countty, for the most part uninhabit
ed. The Abolitionists and Freesoilera at the
North, proclaimed that Congress had the
constitutional right to Legislate so as tq ex
clude or prohibit the introduction of negro
slavery into any of this Territory. And Da
vid VVilmot a Representative from the State
of Pennsylvania amended a proposition to
appropriate three millions of dollars, to ena
ble the President to conclude a Treaty of
Peace with Mexico, by this proviso, i< that
slavery, or involuntary servitude except for
crime, should not exist in any Territory that
might be acquired from Mexico, at the con
clusion of peace.'” This was the terms in
substance of the infamous VVilmot Proviso,
and I regret to say that it met with two much
tavor from the Northern people and their
Representatives in Congress. The Legisla
ture of the several Southern States, declared
with much unanimity thnt Congress had not
the Constitutional Right to prohibit slavery
in the Territories acquired from Mexico, and
if this should be done it would be “resisted
by them at everv hazznrd and to the last ex
tremity. 1 ’ And such was and still is the
undivided sentiment ot the people in every
Southern or slave holding Stnte. This was
the great issue before the people of the Uni
ted States at the meeting of the first session
of the lost Congress. The Northern Repre
sentatives insisting that they had the right to
prohibit slavery in tho Territory, and would
>ass what was termed the VVilmot Proviso
or that purpose at any and " all hazzards,”
The South with equal unanimity was deter
mined to resist it to “ the last extremity.”
“ even to a disruption of the ties that binds
us together as one people.” How was this
question settled by Congress ? Which sec
tion of the Union prevailed in this contest ?
Candor compels me to admit that if wo did
not obtain ail that we desired or could have
wished, we have no just cause of complaint
against the Government ofthe United States.
California mnde application for admission in
to the Union as a State with a clause in her
constitution prohibiting slavery, and con
gress had the right to admit her, and this
was done ; and she had no right to to ex
clude hpr boenusp she prohibited or tolerated
slavery, and if thorp |s no othpr legal or con
stitutional objection to hpr admission into
the Union ss a State, far consistency’s sake
this should not be mentioned. Yet, I ven
ture to say that if she had a clause in her
constitution tolerating slavery,, no Southern
man would have raised his voice in opposi
tion to its admission. In regard to the bal-
lunce or remaining Territory, was the Wil-
mot Proviso applied or not ? I have care
fully examined these Territorial Bills, and I
have looked in vain for any clause which
prohibits the introduction of slavery into the
Territories, and so far from it, j find in each
a clause in these words, “ that they shall
hereafter be admitted into the Union as
3ti|tps, either with or without slavery as the
leoplo of the Territories shall determine.”—
fhe npxt question that was adjusted was
the unsettled and undefined boundary be
tween the State of Texas and the Territory
of New Mgxico. Thp Stqtp ot Texas was
interested in this question, and it was in
cumbent on Congress to make tho settle
ment on such terms os would be satisfactory
to hpr and tfip people of thp United States.
Texas a sluve-holqiiig Slate, lias expressed
her satisfaction at the settlement, and for one
I do not'think that we ought, or have the
right to complain. In fact, I think weought
to manifpst q becoming confidence in her wis
dom and prudence, by acquiescing in hpr de
cision. She is content, we ought at lpast to
be satisfipfi.
It was also a sujijpct o.f complaint at the
South, that constitutional guarantee in favor
of the South for the return of fugitive slaves,
was ihonerative, inasmuch as the Supreme
Court of; the Unitefi States had determined righ
were under no legal obligation to uct, be
cause they were the civil officers of the State
Governments. It become then important in
e general adjustment of all the questions in.
issue between the two sections, to pass a
law With proper agents, to carry into effect
this provision of the constitution, and this,
I am happy to say, was done, and on the
very terms proposed hy Southern Senators
ana Representatives. Tho last of these ad
justment measures had reference to the slave
pens and slave mniket that was kept up in
tho District of Columbia, for selling slaves
brought into the District from Virginia and
Maryland. This was ofiensive to the North
ern section of the Union, nnd as no good
could possibly result to the South from its
continuance, and ns it was also oflensiye to
thelSouthern slaveholder, a bill was passed
to prohibit,' under certain penaltios, this slave
This was the system of measures proposed
end finally passed as the basis lor adjusting,
upon just and equitable terms, all the ques
tions of dispute between the two seotions of
the Union in regard to slavery in tho States
and Teirftories. Pending tlieir discussion in
each branch of Congress, they were denounc
ed by the Abolitionists and Frecsoilers of the
North, and by ultra factionists at the South;
and it is n little remarkable that in Congress
and out of Congress, these measures were op
posed at the same limp by aboli
tionists and ultra Southern Rights men. The
first, because they alledged the measures had
secured to the South and the slave power,
every thing that they had demanded: and
the fatter, that the South had conceded eve-
thing, and the North nothing. The aboli
tionists and free Rollers regard this Sysiom of
measures as so unjust and inhuman, that thev
desire that the Union should be dissolved,
that they may be disconnected altogether
from those who claim the right to hold hu
man beings in bondage ; nnd the Southern
Rights party at the South, denounce them
as an outrage upon the rights of the South,
that should be resisted at all hazzards. They
declare that these measures cannot he sub
mitted to without dishonor, disgrace and
even degradation; while these are the opin
ions and honestly expressed views, no doubt,
of both of these extreme factions, for I can
not give thorn any more respectable cogno-
irp.i, there are conservative men North and
South, and they have heretofore belonged to
each of the two great national politiral par
ties who entertain the opinion that the mea
sures of adjustment adopted by Congress on
this subject, were just und equitable, and
could bo acquiesced in without shame o’* re
proach. Such was the opinion of two thirds
of the representatives from the South when
these measures were passed, ns evidenced by
their votes, end such has been the voice of
the people of this Stato by an unprecedented
majority. The different views entertained by
different persons in regard to these measures,
has given rise to now parties, in Georgia.—
Those who regard these measures as an out
rage upon our rights, and who entertain the
opinion in good failh thpt the Stale cannot
submit to them without dishonor and degra
dation, have summoned their forces to rally
under a new standard for the first time rais
ed, that has inscribed upon its ample folds.
“ Southern Rights.” In looking over the
names thnt are hearing aloft this standard, 1
see in juxta position, Charles J. McDonald,
and Charles Dooghprty, George W. Towns
and John M. Berrien; the editor of the Fed
eral Union and the editor of the Augusta
('wbigj Republic, and alt those distinguished
men who wpre nuilifiers in 1832, nnd who
united with the democratic party in 1840,
and since that time, without any change of
political principles. These are the men that
now lead the Southern Rights party, and
who go for resistance, even to secessipn or a
disruption of the bonds of the Union on ac
count of these measures. They may he
known wherever they are seen, from the fact
that they regard these measures as an outrage
upon the rights of the South, and from the
further fact, that they are the advocates of
the doctrines proclaimed by the nuilifiers in
1832, thnt a State has the right to secede
from the Union. It is composed of those
who wereonce Union men,oncenullifiers,once
democrats and once whigs. They proclaim
ed that old issues were buried, and they
would no longer recognise the late division
of whig and democrat, but would only fel
lowship him os a brother, who, forgetting
former party ties nnd associations, would ral
ly under the new standard of Southern rights.
Those who differed with them in opinion ns
to the character of tbpse measures of both
the old pnrlies, whig and democratic, united
together under the name ofthe Constitution
al Union patty, to prevent the evil conse
quences resulting from the disunion princi
ples of tho Southern Rights organization.—
The first contest between the two parties
was in tho Election of delegates to the con
vention, called by George Towns in Novem
ber lost, under instructions from the Legisla
ture, to adopt measures of resistance to the
admssion of Caliifqrnia into the Union ns a
State. The union party was sustained by
the people, and my candid conviction to-day
is, that the result of their Election has pre-
vented a revolution. It would appear tlidt
this result, would hnyp satisfied tho curiosity
ofthe most enthusiastic disunionists. But
is this the fact ? so far from it, the same
party, led on by thp samp men, lately as
sembled in Milledgeville, and nominated
Charles J. McDonald ns a candidate for
Governor, and denounced these measures as
disgraceful and degrading to the South, and
insists thnt a State has thp right to secede
from the Union at heir will and pleasure.—
And with these principles they go before the
people and ask them for their support and
suffrage. They seek to escape the chirge
of disunion, and declqrp that gl| thpy desire
is to establish the right to secede fqp future
aggressions—onp of tv. o things is certainly
true—they are either for disunion or they
do not believe it dishonorable or disgrqcpful
to the people of Georgia to submit to these
measures. The Southern Rights party have
made a public declaration in favor of the
When is this secession to take place r at the
will and pleasure of the State, or when she
ii^ her sovereign capacity deems it to be ne
cessary for her interest, welfare or happiness.
Is it possible tlmt these brave and chivalrous
spirits would he willing to remain in the
Union when it would' be a degradation to
them. To suppose this, would be an impu
tation upon the name nnd character of the
sons of the south, that I mm unwilling to,
make These Southern Rights men imistt
take one or the other horn of this dilemma,
and be it either, they ought' not to he sup
ported by tho people of Georgia. My im
pression is, that they;, aro for secession, and
the moment a majority of the people shall
confide in them, they will manifest it. YVhy
nominate the President of the Nashville Con
vention ? thnt ihdicaled so clearly its ulti
mate designs in favor of disunion, that tho
old Jackson Democrats in Tennessee, with;
draw from the convention.
see the necessity of calling n Southern Con
gress unless a Southern Confederacy was
contemplated. And who now doubts that
Gov. McDonald is in favor of this Southern
Congress. Is it not as certain that he would
call this Congress or advocate the election of
members to it jf bp is elected Governor, ns
that he approved end signed the proceedings
of that convention. He presided over a dis
union meeting in the city of Macon, and
when the cry of disunion was raised by ' Dr.
William E, Daniel, and responded to by the
whole audience, Qoy.' McDonald snid not one
word, nof did he do a single net to discoun
tenance it. He is as cunning ns a fox, but
ho is so prominent and been so conspicuous
in all thesa Southern Rights meetings, that
we are able to follow his disunioh tracks.—
Last fall before the election for delegates to
the convention after the passage of fhe com
promise measures the Southern Rights party
were openly for resistance and the Honora
ble W. T. Colquitt gave it ns hia opinion
that secession was the best qnd most efficient
remedy, and hundreds and thousands of Sou
thern Rights men responded to these senti
ments. The result of the election for dele
gates to the Convention in 1850, has admon
ished them if they succeed in obtaining the
confidence ofthe people, they must conceal
their design oi seceding from the Union. In
my intercourse with the people, l find thnt
certain crors-road politicians are laboring, to
persuade the people that the issue made in
the election for delegates to the convention
has been finally settled. And many good
Union men who are democrats, have been
induced to go over to the Southern Rights
party, upon the ground that Gov. McDonald
is the candidate of the democratic party. Is
this true—who composed the convention that
nominated Charles J. McDoaaid ? The-first
motion that was made in, that body was to
call James Smythe, the editor of u 'wKig
newspaper to the Chair to organize the con
vention. Do you think that no would have
occupied that position if it had been a meet
ing of tho old democratic party, or would he
now be urging upon the people the support
of McDonald for Governor ? Ilpw did i( hap
pen that there were thirty five firin and de
cided whigs in the convention that nomina
ted him ? It is not to be believed that all
these men have changed their ancient politi
cal principles, without our having some evi
dence of the fact. The Southorn Rights men
who wero onco democrats, and who desire to
mislead the plain,honest,hut uninformed dem
ocrat, wil| say that they all belong now to
the democratic party, and they have changed
their politics; All 1 have to say tp this is,
that such men as make this declaration are
at issue with their nominee for Governor,
Charles J. McDonald. He has published it
to the world that they have not changed and
ere still whigs, and as a-matter of course op
posed to the democratic party. In his letter
accepting the nomination tendered to-him by
the convention, ho says,. “ the nomination
tendered to me by whigs and democrats, 1
accept,” &r. &c. But again, 'if he is the
candidate of the demociatic party, why did
they not call the convention that nominated
him, the convention ofofthe democratic par
ty ? Was it an oversight in its members ?—
So far from it, I am informed the only dis
pute that arose in the convention was in
regard to its name. The proposition was
distinctly made to call it the convention of
the democratic party, and gave rise to so
much feeling nnd opposition, that the propo
sition was withdrawn for fear that it would
break up the convention in a row. Yet in
the face of these facts, miserable demagogues
will attempt-to deceive the honest, but con
sistent Union democrats into the support of
their candidate upon the ground thnt he is
the democratic candidate. I might with the
same propriety say, that the Hon. Ilowell
Cobb was the democratic candidate. He has
been identified all his lilo with the democra
tic party, and for eight years in succession,
has he been elected as a democrat to the nn-
tional Congress. And during lba last Con
gress ho was elected by the democratic par
ty speaker of the House of Representatives,
and he served them in thnt capacity until the
4th of March last. But Ido not put Mr.
Cobb’s support on the ground that he is a
democrat, although ns a democrat no man
is more reliable, but 1 met it upon theground
that be is a uuuslilulionaj Union man and in
favor of abiding thp cqmpropiise measures
passed by Congress—in favor of the Union,
and opposed to secession, and for dissolving
the Union for any enuse that now exists.—
He will bp supported by all those who ngiee
with him in these issues, whether they have
been opposed in politics heretofore or not.
A UNjON DEMOCRAT
OF 1830, 1840 and I860.
un- by the (ire-eaters ; and is therefore, *
not Union man, as will be seen hy (he foil
meeting Ims teen c;
relief for the destiti
aid of tho clergy invoked ii
A similar meeting has also .
Pickens County. In some parts of K. r
pi corn is selllng at $4 per bushel.—Jack- I
sonville Republican. *
Governor Collier of Alabama. ■
Tho re-election of Governor Collier, with-' r
out opposition, naturally excites many in
quiries ns to his opinions upon the issue now
beforo the country. Wo find in the Tuscu- I
loosa Observer, a letter which sots conlrover- 1
sy at rest. It was published on the eve of
tho election, and explains the reason why the
secession parly in some of the count!
for Mr. Ynncoy in opposition to “
Collier: It was simply because ....
does not believe in tho doctrines ad'
llio fire-eaters ; and is there!
Tbe' Crops Drought dec,
We have noticed in our exchaqgp papers
for some time past coiqplqinta of a Very dis
tressing drought prevailing in various sections
ofthe dountry, embracing parts ofthis State,
Georgia, South Caroljna, ^ennessee, Virgin
ia, Kentucky, Mississippi, Louisiana, und
Arkansas. In the aouth-wesl the cotton
as well as the graiq crops have suffered se-
vetely. Grpat scarcity of provisions, and
consequent suffering is- anticipated in many
places In Tuscaloosa county, a
faithful abstract of his opinions:
1. Gov. Collier denies that tacn
constitutional right—claims it as an
natural right outside, above nnd bfy md t!
constitution, revolutionarg in its ettects ai
consequences ; aud only to be used as a last'--
resort,
1. In this light ho says it was regarded by'
Jefferson, Madison, Jackson, and the Repub
lican party. This is the true doctrine dedu-'
cible irom theiesolutionsof 1798, and Mr. •
Madison’s Report to the Virginia House of 1
Delegates. * ' ■ i
3. He is opposed to tho Montgomery Plat-
und .opposed to n Southern Congress, and' 1
opposed to resistance, or secession, ■ for any
thing that has occured. Has not said that
he is in favor of the Georgia Platform.
4. He is not in favor of maintaining the-'
compromise measures ns a settlement. Would '
be glad to see many of them modified in es- '
sentiol particulars; but docs not specify:
either the measures or particulars which he''
would desire to seo modified.
5. He regards the Nashville Convention'
as a failure, because it was not the off-spring -
ot the people, and because they were indiffer
ent, or opposed to it. Whenever the peo
ple demnnded such a Convention, he will fa
vor it upon theground that they are honest'
and competent to manage their own affairs.
This is a fair abstract ofGovernor Collier’s
opinions, from yvhiqh it appears that he is a ‘
very good Union man. He differs only in'
one unimportant point from the GeargiaPlet-
form. He is willing to a modification of
some of the laws ; whereas, the Georgia'
Convention, in order to close the controver
sy while it did not approve of all the mea
sures, expressed a willingness to acquiesce-'
in them us a final settlement. This is the on
ly point of difference *, and we cannot regard ;
it as sufficiently essential to have prevented
Ilia Union men of Alabama from yielding to-'
Governor Collier their cordial support. We
arc glad, therefore, that the name of Mr.
Shields was withdrawn, and that Collier has
been elected without any opposition', save-
thnt gotten up by the disunionists proper.—
It gives nn importance to the Union victory
of Alabama, which it would not otherwise-'
have had. Alabama, therefore, has-a Union'
legislation in Congress, and e Union - Gover-'
nor.—Journal Sf messenger.
From tlie Union Banner.
A Word to the Old Whigs-
The Disunionists finding that they art drib-*
ly losing ground with tho old- Democrats,'•
are now milking n desperate ' effort to win'
over the old Whites ana Slate'Rights men-
to their ranks. Now what can qny. honest
Whig gain by voting for MpDonnld' or' the
Fire-Eaters ? Have you pot tried’him of 1 ’
old? What kind of a Goverqqp 1 did’ he'
make ? Did he not fiqd the Slat* in peCuni;
ary prosperity ? Did lip not leave-it in pt'-‘
cuniary ruin ? Did he not find' the' Central' 1
Bank with ample funds ? Did lie'not'squan
der them all upon political favorites,- and'
leave a debt ol a quarter of a' million to" be'
paid by taxation ? Did ho hot,borrow money-
al a high per cent to loan ot a 7ou> per cent ?
Did he not cause the people to lose thousands'
and tens of thousands by-the depreciation of
Central Bank bills, occasioned by his short
sighted policy ? Did he not run the Peniten
tiary, over head and ears, in debt ? Did you 1
not war against; him for this policy ? How
then con you support him now : • What as
surance have you thnt he would' not' again;
bring about pecuniary turn and distress?.
Surely no honest, sensible Whig can support'
Judge McDonald on account of 1 his State
policy.
Can Whigs supnort him on account of his ■
position on national issuos ? Does he enter
tain any opinion in common with you upoq'
any one qf those issues ? Not opo. Why.
then support Charles J. McDonald ? Be
cause he is truer than Mr Cobh on the Slave
ry question ?—What guarantee have you qf-
this? He has been on nil sides, of almost'
every question. Where was he in 1832 ?
He then defended the proclamation and force'
bill. He theu denounced South Carolina
and her policy. He then declared the tariff
was not oppressive. He then opposed and •
denounced the sentiments of Troup.
Where was he In 1839. ? When the Geor
gia Legislature passed a bilk retaliating upon'
the State of Maine for refusing to give up.'
her nbgro thipvps; what did|this same Charier'
J. McDonald do ? Did hs not pocket the
bill ? Where then stood this boasted guardian •
of Southern Rights ? Then, he sidpd "'itiv
the Abolitionists. What security have you'
that hq will not do so again ? Wlmt securi
ty have you that he is sincere even now ?
A few month; ago he presided over the dis--
unionists at Macon and Nashville.
A few months ago he signed the resolu
tions ofthe Nashville Convention, called h'
Southern Congress, with powers to declare -
the Southern States 'INDEPENDENT'!
This, he it remembered, was after the
promise measures had passed Coni
McDonald was then a Disunionist tor
ISTWG CAUSES ! Recently, in hi
to the Charleston Committee,
against secession for existin;
Now what security
as to tho position Judg<
eupy next