A Cr | THE DEMOCRATIC WATCHMAN, VOL. 7. BELLEFONTE, ET FRIDAY, OCT. 8 1862, NO. 88. — . Dalf- Sheet. 0= We are again compelled to issue a Ealf-sheet. We have no hands yet and it ig uncertain when we will be able to get any. Probably not till after the election. » Who was Killed at the Second Battle of Bull Run, fought August 29th, 1862. Many are the hearts that feel sad at the announcement of the death of this noble young man. He was greatly beloved by a large circle of arquaintainces and his loss will be severely felt by many whose delight it was to call him friend. His native and unstudied attractiveness of manner had greatly endeared him to those with whom he associated, but his amiabili- ty of character and agreeableness of man- ners were the least of his virtues when compared with the strength and beauty of his mind, A retentive memory had accu mulated a store of useful knowledge, which he imparted with great success asa teacher: Though young, the fires of patriotism had already blazed high in his manly bosom, and when he saw the ominous cloud, charged with all the elements of civil strife, lower upon the political horizon of his beloved country, he sought by every means in his power to avert the impending danger. Like a true patriot he supported conciliatory measures as the surest coarse to quell the rising storm. But the muttering thunder of the coming tempest grew louder. He saw the fearful contest hastening on, but an instinctive dread of imbruing his hands in the blood of his own countrymen, caused him still to pause, and it was only after he saw the fear- ful earnestness of his country’s enemies in their endeavors t> destroy a Government which nature had taught him to love, that he went forth to battle for the Constitution and the Union. And now he has falien!— Far away on the bloody field, without a ten der hand to ease the dying posture, his noble spirit took its flight. The realization of his dearest hopes bave been denied him. The restoration of peace to our distracted coun try, for which he so ardently looked, his eyes have not seen ; but we trust he bas gone to that happy land where *¢ nations learn war no more,’”’ and where peace and happiness abound forevermore. In his early death his parents mourn "the loss of their youngest child. Who will wonder that their hearts are almost dis- tracted with grief, that t'ieir almost sights legs eyes send forth torrents of tears, or that their gray heads are bent down with sor row ? But let those of us who survive him em- ulate his virtues, and trust that his early removal, on account of which we feel so sadly bereaved, is his infinite gain. W. A.M serrate lA pr I= “Give usa rebel ictory, let our ar- mies be destroyed, iiaryland conquered, Washington captured, the President ex- jled and the gover ment destroyed ; give us these and any o:zcr calamities that can result from defeat »d ruin, sooner than a victory with McC! lan as General.” Reader, you may be surprised at this infamous sentiment ; and would natural ly think that it originated in the latitude of Charleston, bnt this is not the fact. It was coined in the loyal State of Jllinois—the «Rail Splitter’s” own State’and by the Pres- dents leading organ in that State —the Chi- cago Post. We wonder where a Democratic newspav per would land if it would utter such lan« guage in reference to an Abolition General? 1t is very remakable how careless these new “Union savers’” are in the choice of their language. * Tag Point oF 'DirreruNce-One of our Democratic exchanges thus points out the difference between an abolitionis: and a *‘reb el”: © «The difference between an abolitionist and a *‘rebel’’ is, that a ‘‘rebel’” wants to set up a new Government, and the Abolition- Protest To Hon. JorN A. GamsLe. President, and the other members of the Democratic Congressional Conference. : GENTLEMEN: —The undersigned. conferees from the counties of Clinton and Centre, re- spectfully but earnestly protest against the action of the Conference, both as to irregu- larity of proceeding in detail, and as to its refusal to make a Democratic nomination. We protest against the action of a major~ ity of the Conference in permitting a Con- feree from Lycoming to cast the two votes for Tioga conaty. The absurdity of such action was fully demonstrated in the Con- ference when four of the other Conferees voted for the candidate of Tioga county, who was defeated for nomination only by the Ly~ coming substitute of Tioga casting the votes of that county against its own nominee, aud in violation of its instructions. We protest again, that the Conferees were elected to nominate a DEMOCRATIC candidate for Cengress, and for no other purpose: as 1s fully shown by the fact that the Demo- cratic appointed Conferees to assemble tog- ether for the the purpose of agreeing upon a candidate and cach (except Potter) named a Democrat as its first choice for the nomi nation. It was not proposed in any of the County Conventions that any other but a democrat should be nominated, or that no nomination should be made. The Conferees therefore, who voted against making a nom- ination,ceased to represent the authority that eppointed them, and their action thereafter could have no binding force upon any person. We protest against the action of the Con- ference, in refusing to make a nomination, because the avowed object of such action was to induce Democrats to abandon their party organizations and vote for Mr. JaMEs T. HaLg, the present Republican member for re-election to Congress. thus, in effect en- dorsing and approving of the action of of those Democrats who, at the last election, joined the so-called Union” organization, and who were therefore denounced by near- ly the whole of the Democratic party in Clin- ton, Centre and Lycoming counties. We further protest against such action as would make Mr. Hair the candidate of Democrats, because he has neve: belonged to their party—has never supported one of its principles or measures —was the biter and vindictive reviler of ANDREW JACKSON, of James K, Pork, of Francis R. SHUNK, of SrepneN-A. Dougtas, and of all the wen who sustained any of those distinguished patriots or the measures which they advocated —be- cause te was always an Abolitionist, and we believe is so still—because in Congress he voted for the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia, to the great diszust of all Southern Union men, and to the delight of the Rebels— and he also voted for (or res fused to vote at all) revolutionary, incendiary and s-cession measures— because he failed as a Representative not only to resist these measures, but also neglected to oppose the corruptions and frauds commited by Govern- ment agents, the evidence of which had been reported to congress by committees