flag, captured our forts, made war upon the
Union, and proceeded to dissolve it by force--let us suppose that a
committee from any convention had then dared to nominate General Jackson
for the Presidency upon such a platform as that adopted at Chicago,
proposing an armistice and cessation of hostilities until a National
Convention could be assembled, accompanied by the declaration that the
rebellion could not be crushed by war, who doubts what would have been
the course of that devoted patriot? He would have stamped the
disgraceful and treasonable resolutions under his feet, and indignantly
scouted the traitors who offered them. And now this McClellan Convention
at Chicago professes to represent the Democratic party. As Jefferson was
the founder of the old _Republican_ party, Jackson was the father of the
_Democratic_ party. Now, with perhaps one exception, is there a _single
member_ of that Convention (assuming the name of 'Democratic') that
(like myself) supported General Jackson in 1823, 1824, 1828, and 1832,
and uniformly adhered to the Democratic party until after the rebellion
of 1861?

What right had that Convention to assume the name of Democracy, while
trampling upon the advice of the founder of the party, and all its great
and vital principles? How dare they offer an 'armistice' and 'the
cessation of hostilities' to rebels in arms against their country,
especially when the so-called rebel government had again and again
declared that they would negotiate upon no terms, except the
acknowledgment of their independence, and the definitive dissolution of
the Union? But, above all, how dare they record the disgraceful and
treasonable falsehood, that the war to suppress the rebellion had
failed, and ask the freemen of America to indorse at the polls such a
declaration?

And has, indeed, all the blood of patriots shed in defence of the Union
in this war, been poured out in vain? Ye patriot soldiers! now in the
field, say, are you unable or unwilling to suppress the rebellion? Say
it not only in words, but answer the foul accusation by your votes in
the approaching Presidential election.

The Chicago McClellan Convention says that the war is a failure, and
that therefore there must be an armistice and a cessation of
hostilities. Will not your answer at the polls be this: 'It is a foul
and treasonable falsehood?'

And is this war for the Union indeed a failure? Let our many and
well-fought battles upon the ocean a