gin of French accent, and piercing, intense earnestness of manner, commanded profound attention, and fascinated all who saw and heard. His speech was a brilliant and noble effort, and was rapturously applauded to the echo. The effect of this speech was to greatly animate and reassure the friends of Douglas. He said:

I have not been at all discouraged by the emotion which has been attempted to be created in this body, by those who have seceded from it. We from the farthest South were prepared; we had heard around us the rumors which were to be initiatory of the exit which you have witnessed on this day, and we knew that conspiracy which had been brooding for months past, would break out on this occasion, and for the purposes which are obvious to every member. Sirs, there are in political life men who were once honored by popular favor, who consider that the favor has become to them an inalienable property, and who cling to it as to something that can no longer be wrested from their handspolitical fossils so much incrusted in office that there is hardly any power that can extract them. [Applause.] They saw that the popular voice was clearly manifesting to this glorious nation who was to be her next ruler. More than eight or ten months before this Convention assembled, the name of that future ruler of these States had been thrown into the canvass and was before the people. Instead of bringing a candidate to oppose him; instead of creating before the people issues upon which the choice of the nation could be enlightened; instead of principles discussed, what have we seen? An unrelenting war against the individual presumed to be the favorite of the nation [applause]—a war waged by an army of unprincipled and unscrupulous politicians, leagued with a power which could not be exerted on their side without disgracing itself and disgracing the nation. [Renewed applause.]

Mr. Soule declared secession meant disunion. He said, however, the South had backed out from its threat made on the California question. He said further:

John C. Calhoun, when the famous compromise tendered by Mr. Clayton of Delaware was being di-cussed in the United States SenateJohn C. Calhoun considered that the proffer to place in the bands of one federal tribunal the question of the extent of power in the Territories was to the South a sufficient guarantee to make acceptable the compromise tendered; and where Calhoun could stand a Southern man need not fear to stand.

He declared the people of the South would not respond to the call made upon them by the Secessionists. He said Louisiana was unwilling to risk ber future, and the future of the Union, upon impracticable issues and merely theoretical abstractions.

Mr. Stirman of Arkansas here withdrew from the Convention. He was sorry to go, but under his instructions, had no alternative.

Mr. Flournoy of Arkansas explained how he happened to be instructed to vote for Breckenridge. He then proceeded in the following eloquent strain:

I am a Southern man, born and reared amid the institution of slavery. I first learned to whirl the top and bounce the ball with the young African. Every thing I own on earth is the result of slave labor.

The bread that feeds my wife and little ones is produced by the labor of slaves. They live on my plantation with every feeling of kindness as between master and slave. Sir, if I could see that there is any thing intended in our platform unfriendly to the institution of slavery-if Ï could see that we did not get every constitutional right we are entitled to, I would be the last on earth to submit in this Union; I would myself apply the torch to the magazine and blow it into atoms before I would submit to wrong. [Applause.] But I feel that in the doctrine of non-intervention and popular sovereignty are enough to protect the

interests of the South.

Mr. Dodge of Iowa made a speech in which he praised Judge Douglas and Col. Richardson extravagantly, and wondered at the hostility displayed toward them by the South.

Before the result of the ballot was announced, Mr. Stoughton challenged the vote of Vermont. He had declined to vote, and yet the whole vote of the State had been cast. Mr. Smith of Vermont contended that, according to instructions, he had the right to cast the whole vote of the State.

As the name of Horatio Seymour had been mentioned and a vote cast for him, Mr. Bissell of New York withdrew the name of Seymour, reading a letter of declension from that gentleman. Mr. Seymour said in his letter:

"I do not suppose my name will be presented on that occasion, but if it is I request that you will, as a delegate from this district, withdraw it from their consideration. I cannot, under any circumstances, be a candidate for the office of President or Vice-President."

Mr. Bissell said:

It is due to Mr. Seymour to say that he has ever expressed to me, his neighbor and friend, the same feeling. Gentlemen have entertained different views; and a paper in New York (I regret to pollute my lips with its name), the New York Herald, has insisted all the time that Mr. Seymour was not honest; but, as his friend and neighbor, I withdraw his name.

A Maryland delegate withdrew his vote for Breckenridge and declined

to vote.

RESULT OF THE FIRST BALLOT.

The Secretary here announced the result of the first ballot as follows:

Mr. Church of New York offered a resolution. Objections were made. Many delegates wanted another ballot before a resolution was introduced. The resolution was read as follows:

Resolved, That Stephen A. Douglas, of the State of Illinois, having now received two-thirds of all the votes given in this Convention, he is hereby declared, in accordance with the rules governing this body and in accordance with the uniform custom and rules of former Democratic National Conventions, the regular nominee of the Democratic party of the United States for the office of President.

Mr. Church made a speech in favor of his resolution. He said:

We have yielded every thing but personal honor in order to heal up the divisions of this Convention. One question after another has been presented to us, and we have been asked to yield this point, and that point, and the other point, and we have never failed to respond whenever we have been asked until we were required to yield up every thing which distinguishes our manhood-nay, more, every thing which distinguishes the manhood of the 200,000 Democrats behind us. [Applause.] When we came to that point--though we say it with pain, and sorrow, and anguish-when we were asked to admit, without question or examination, the whole body of seceders who came here to our doors-not repentant, not determined to abide by our action, but demanding the surrender of our principles into their hands-when we

were asked to do that, and, besides, to give up our candidate and the candidate of the choice of the Democracy of New York-a candidate who will sweep New York as with a whirlwind [applause]-when we were asked to do all that, we said firmly we cannot in honor comply with your demands.

Mr. Church said of the adoption of the two-thirds rule in the shape it took in Charleston, that it was "outrageous, undemocratic, despotic, wrong" but New York had submitted to it for the sake of harmony. Mr. Gittings of Maryland rose to most solemnly protest against the proposed action. He said:

The gentleman from New York (Mr. Church), says in one breath that New York has always desired to offer the olive-branch; and in the next breath he throws a fire-brand in the midst of the Democratic party which will create a flame no power on earth can quench. The twothirds rule is one of the cardinal principles for the government of Democratic Conventions; and better not make a nomination at all than rescind a rule for the purpose of making any one man a candidate.

After some further debate, Mr. Church withdrew his resolution for another ballot.

Mr. Flournoy of Arkansas voted for Douglas this time.

Mr. Becker stated that himself and two of his colleagues had come to the conclusion to withdraw from the Convention. They were ready to meet all the responsibility for so doing. The following is the result

of the

Whole number of votes, 1942.

The increased vote on this ballot was from Pennsylvania.

Mr. Hoge of Virginia wanted to move the unanimous nomination of Douglas. Mr. Clark of Missouri, who had voted against Douglas, said it was his purpose to second the motion of Mr. Hoge. Mr. H. now said:

I now beg leave to submit the following resolution, being the same as that offered by the gentleman from New York (Mr. Church), with a slight modification that he and I have made :

Resolved unanimously, That Stephen A. Douglas, of the State of Illinois, having now received two-thirds of all votes given in this Convention is hereby declared, in accordance with rules governing this body, and in accordance with the uniform customs and rules of former Democratic National Conventions, the regular nominee of the Democratic party of the United States for the office of President of the United States.

Mr. Sayles of Rhode Island made a speech about the late Democratic victory in that State, and said he had been told in Charleston that they were hardly better than Black Republicans.

Mr. Seymour of New York enthusiastically indorsed Douglas, though he had heretofore opposed him.

Mr. Mason of Kentucky made a speech, in which he doubted whether the fires would blaze so high upon the mountain-tops as had been asserted. He thought the resolution of Mr. Church injudicious, and proposed an amendment as follows:

Now, if you will not say in the resolution that this is the rule which has heretofore governed the Democratic party-because you voted at Charleston, that it was not, and for our accommodation; if you will not make this new construction, but simply declares that, under all the circumstances, Mr. Douglas ought to be the unanimous nominee of this party, I should not be surprised if the State of Kentucky would agree with you, and that quite likely you may get the vote of that State, though I cannot say it with certainty.

Mr. Richardson of Illinois-There has never been a nomination for President under any other construction than that made by my friend from New York in his resolution. It is true you agreed at Charleston that you would not do it this time, but always heretofore you have nominated the candidate by a two-third vote. Mr. Stevenson of Virginia, in 1848, when the New York delegation was excluded, and Gen. Cass was nominated, declared that 170 votes were two-thirds. The action of the Convention has been uniform upon this subject.

Mr. Craig of Missouri-Is there any objection to withdrawing the resolution and declaring the nomination unanimous hy a big, old-fashioned Democratic yell? [Laughter and cries of "Question," "question."]

The question being taken on the resolution of Mr. Church, it was adopted by an unanimous aye.

Now a storm of cheers went up. The banner of the Keystone State was hung out from the upper gallery, and somebody produced on the stage a flag on which it was written Pennsylvania good for 40,000 majority for Douglas.