Nashville Daily Patriot

DAILY $5; TRI-WEEKLY $5;

J. C. Morgan,
John B. Callender,
AUSTIN L. CARY,
SMITH, MORGAN & CO.
Editors and Proprietors

Office No. 16,
Deaderick Street.

FOR PRESIDENT
MILLARD FILLMORE
OF NEW YORK
FOR VICE PRESIDENT.
ANDREW J. DONELSON.
OF TENNESSEE.

AMERICAN ELECTORAL TICKET.
FOR THE STATE,
NEILL S. BROWN, of Davidson.
HORACE MAYNARD, of Knox.
FOR THE DISTRICTS.
1st. Dist.-N. G. TAYLOR, of Carter.
2d.
MOSES WHITE, of Knox.
3d.
REESE B. BRABSON, of Hamilton.
4th.
W. P. HICKERSON, of Coffee
5th.
ROBERT HATTON, of Wilson.
6th.
W. H. WISENER, of Bedford.
7th.
C. C. CROWE, of Giles.
8th.
J. M. QUARLES, of Montgomery.
9th.
ISAAC R. HAWKINS, of Carroll.
10th.
JOSEPH R. MOSBY, of Fayette.

TUESDAY, SEPT. 23, 1856.

Old Line Whigs.

The Union and American, and indeed the whole democratic party, are claiming the vote of the old line whig party for Buchanan and Breckinridge in the approaching election. There is no evidence of an intention on the part of the old supporters of Henry Clay to vote for the democratic candidates, that we have been able to find but on the contrary there is abundant testimony that nearly all of them will support and are supporting, with all their might and main, Fillmore and Donelson. Such is the declaration of the whig party in Maryland, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Maine Georgia, and indeed every State where their conventions have yet met for consultation upon the question of the Presidency. And while we write the wires are transmitting the intelligence that the national Whig Convention have unanimously nominated these glorious patriots. Against the authoritative declarations of those conventions, expressing the will of the constituency of the party, the democratic party are only able to flaunt to the world the isolated support of individuals of that party, here and there, in different States, of their nominees. But outside the evidence of the declarations of old whig conventions that that party are supporting Fillmore and Donelson, we have no hesitation in declaring it is our solemn opinion, that no old line whig maintaining his ancient political principles can consistently vote for any other candidates. He could do so only upon the ground either that the democratic party are advocating different measures from those they held in the days when they and the whig party were the only ones known to the country, or that the present American party are advocating measures entirely opposed to those formerly put forth by the whig party. Let us first see if the democratic party are the same they were in the days when combatted by Henry Clay. And upon this point we have no hesitation in saying, without fear of contradiction, that they are. Take the Cincinnati platform upon which Buchanan and Breckinridge are standing. It is word for word the Baltimore platform of 1852 as far as the latter went. There is in it the same opposition to all that was ever dear to a whig in the policy of the government; there is in it the same demagogueism that formerly excited their contempt, and there is in it yet the same slurs and innuendos upon the honesty and integrity of the whig party that ever excited the loathing and disgust of honorable men. There is not one word changed, not one erased, not a comma moved: the same stereotyped declaration that has been over and over again promulgated by that party in opposition to the whig party: in fact they are the same party in everything except that demagogical radicalism founded upon a love of the spoils of office which of late years have driven so many of the honest men of their party out of their ranks and into that of the American. We ask James C. Jones, Pierce and Pratt and all those who combatted Franklin Pierce and the democratic party in 1852 with so much vehemence, if Buchanan is not standing upon the Baltimore platform of that year; nay more, we ask those same gentlemen if they do not remember the heavy blows they dealt Gen. Cass in 1848 because of his advocacy of that "odious squatter sovereignty doctrine," and if Mr. Buchanan is not now the open and avowed squatter sovereignty candidate of the democratic party for the Presidency. We ask all the whigs everywhere if they are not the same party who pursued Henry Clay to the day of his death with the basely false charge of bargain and corruption for the sole purpose of party triumph, and who now, when all the world knows the infamous slander had its origin in the conduct of James Buchanan, and is, and was, without any foundation in truth as regards Mr. Clay, refuse, for the same purpose of party success, to do the great statesman, who is sleeping in the city of the dead, the simple justice to acknowledge their error and retract the charge? Is not that same party—standing, as we said, upon the Baltimore platform of 1852—odious and disgusting to every whig, in its slurs upon the honesty and patriotism of that party, and wholly objectionable in its denunciation of all their cherished political principles—now upholding James Buchanan the advocate of squatter sovereignty—James Buchanan the Federalist of 1814 and '15—James Buchanan the intriguer of 1825, upon whose disreputable conduct Gen. Jackson based his charge of bargain and corruption against Mr. Clay; the same who has not only kept his own mouth shut, but religiously sealed that of Robert P. Letcher, of Ky., for fear Mr. Clay would be triumphantly and gloriously acquitted of the infamous imputation of bargaining his honor for office? We have no hesitation in saying in view of what we have said above, with the exception made, that the democratic party are not different from what they were when the whig party were their opponents and that no old line whig can now vote for Jas. Buchanan. Upon the other enquiry whether the American party are in antagonism to the principles of the old whig party, nothing need be said. The American party was organized upon principles wholly in accordance with the professed declarations of both the old parties. They all may be summed up in almost a word, and comprised in the phrase of "purity and economy" in the administration of the government, both State and Federal. There is not a principle in any of their platforms, from first to last, that a democrat or a whig may not hold and be consistent with his former political faith. The intention of the party was not to invite opposition; it was to secure the union of the American people for the sake of the Constitution, and the perpetuation of our freedom and national and individual prosperity, and they put no principle in any of their platforms but that which every true lover of our country and her glory, both native and foreign, may vote for, and fight for, if occasion shall occur. No, we say again, no old line whig can vote with the democratic party for James Buchanan.