Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1841-1853, 1848-06-01

not presented only insisted upon the rights
hich the delegations from all the States entitled
Mr. Hsmlin insisted that the Quetii0n had sssdy been
settled by the decision Of the convention, that each dseg-
ton shall determine the manner in which the vote Of their
own State shall be eiveu The mooe submitted BY the
gentleman from Massachusetts, therefore entirely ont OF
order And If this not il il not IN Older for the
gentleman TO raise this question in the midst OF ballot
The chair decided the proposition Of MI Hslei to Be IN
order
order that this question could not be raised while The cleIk
reading off the votes Of the States.
The chair said that the clerk reading simply with
view TO the correction Of vote, there no mpIopsy
in making the motion at this time
Mr. Hsnnegan then read fom the Baltimore Suns report
Of yessrdy-a paper whose reports OF the proceedings Of
public bodies he characterized Of the highest Order and
whose general character Of accuracy was beyond all
what decision Of the convention yesterday
the South Carolina case aud that the decision there was
that Gen. Commander is entitled TO the right Of casting The
OF South Carolina this convention he said,
also that he did not know what the gentlemen from Mas
sachusets referred when he said he borrowed some OF his
sayings from State but he would say that he had
from gentleman himself he had borrowed from
high source But however that might be, he had
borrowed his political principles from Massachusetts,.
The question was then taken on Mr. Hallettf resolution
and il was rejected.
concluded the chair decided the result to be;yess 1915
nays 1885,
So the convention refused lay the "twO-thid resolu
ton" the table, las moved by General Howard, for the
purpose receiving the report Of the committee the New
York dsegae and the consideration Of that resolution was
resumed
Mr. Morton, OF Massachusetts,, moved the previous ques
ton, and the motion sustained The question then be-
The resolution adopting the two thirds rule was By
YEAs-Msine 8; New Hampshire 6; Mass 10; Vermont
Rhode Island 8; Connecticut g. New Jersey u Delaware
Maryland 7; Virginia ~, n Carolina ~; South CsFoliBs 81
Georgia 10; Florida 81 Alabama Mississippi s. LOUISIANA
6; Texas 81 Arkansas g. Tennessee Is; Kentucky -; Liz
nOs 9; Michigan 5; lows 4; Mi;sou, !; Total 10
NAYs-Moss q Vermont 3; Rhode Island ]; Pennsylvs-
mia instIucted) 26 Delaware Maryland Ohio %; Ind
ana 8; Missouri 6; Wisconsin a. Total rs
On notion then. 20 minutes past O'Clock
Adjourned 10 s p NJ
ArrrnEoox SESSION.
Mr.. Howard Chairman Of the committee on Credentials,
made report in the New York delegation case scco snl-
ed by few remarks, explanatory The committee. before
entering their doties and examining ceden adopt
ed the following resolution:
Resolved That committee refuse open the discus
sion the conflicting parties from New Yolk, now
tending for the National Democratic Convention,
each party shall pledge Themselves abide the decision
Of said convention and agree to support, by all bonosbs
means the nominees Of this convention
The committee reply this resolution had received the
following letter from the Herkmer and Utica BsInburns
delegates;
To the Committee en- Crsdentials-The delegates Of the
democracy The State OF New York 10 the Baltimore Con-
respectfully protest against The decsion OF the COM
mittee that before entering upon Of the
idenee their rights seats in the Convention aid be-
foe they have become members Of that body they shall
pledge themselves abide the OF the Convention,
support nominees. TheywVuld feel themselves un-
worthy represent the democracy Of New York il they
could submit condition which npesches the integrity
of their which dshonor State
by subecting its delegates TO condition which the Conssa-
lion expressly declined TO impose upon the delegates Of any
ether State ia the Union prior their admission The del
egaes of democrzcy of New York must lie admitted 10
the Baltimore National Convention, Internationally or not
at all
On behalf Of democratic delegates Of the State Of New
York C. C. CkMBERLrEo,
JARED WILSON.
In reply 10 the resolution, the following Iecsiv
ed from the Syracuse Albany (Hunker delegation;
meeting of the NJ fOIk delegation TO the Democratic
Nsora Convention known the Syracuse delegation, held
at the Exchange Hotel in the city Of Baltimore Monday
morning. May 22d il being understood that the right OF said
delegation in said convention would be contested
conflicting claimants, il was unanimously
Resoired That said Baltimore Convention be respectful
requested decide upon the right Of said deiee'n to
therein and 10 Of said State said conveuti
at the earliest practicable period after the assembling the
Of
Resolved, further, That the said delegation in submit
their claim admission % The rghful delegation from
State New York, and in requesting decision thereon
know ledge The authority of this convention TO detemin
;e!s TIE Question Of .d9, y, s,s eyss sP
decision the committee shall make, upon deter
which delegation is entitled TO said seats, and votes,
/ ii will support such nominees as shall be presented
for the support Of the democratie party
One Of the committee had entered the following p
IFS proceedings.
| The undersigned having Obtained leave 10 file
against the resolution in the following WORDS
| Here inserted the resolution adopted By Y
tee credentials
Adopted by the committee on Credentials, be
came the two delegations from the State Of NJ
known the one as The Utica, and The other
deleg ons,-both claiming seats in the Nation
Convention, being held al Baltimore.
/ The undersigned, 10 pursuaDce Of leave 81
| agsinst the resolution.
| First. because it exceeds the power Of thn
power having been given to said committee b
to prescribe tests, but only TO examine the
| between said delegation out Of which The
! foI delegation arises; and further, 10 report
| con- ention, with or without opinion up
| the committee might deem most advisable.
| Second that il the publicly proc rsd
| OF the constituency Of either Of the dele
preme law, and no pledge which said dc
| 10 abide nominations would be bin
| stituency, OF render them democratic, II
| they claim their political creed, az
constitution Of The U. s.
Third In the opinion Of the upce
set forth by The Utica convention
1.-The states-ate Iepugnsnt 10 the lette
4 stiiution, and dangerous 10 the safety
And while these doctTines stlli conf
proclaimed political creed Of the Ut
| the delegates are but the special
ce1d, under no-circumsi.uccs, hold
sul,s,icn or association with said
! reasons voted sgsust any fe<oinii
possibility be iAfeiied that he W
/ tledge 10y any sgent with jimr1
/ denscrslc nominations Of he b
purge the una toned for political
Respectfully,
| Tho following, IN The shape
| Il de report 81 the 6hsl action
Wherea<, The coumlttet ba<
/ Il would not proceed 70 1heip>
| = - = - vel l'on ~ ii the q
] lE,l = p1ould <bids BY ,he
le4rrS 4 & noeinees. ~H>l