The Rutland herald. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1850-1852, 1850-08-22
Fus the Herald.
WING CANDIDATE FOR CON.
GRESS.

iIanspired in regard 10 the nomination
Of y wiig candidate for Congress for
this district, AID ] now wish to submit
the result to the consider alton Of your
readers:
II appears tina, our District Commit.
tee acting honestly, and in good faith,
~ have no doubt, first called a mass
Convention To be held ut Manchester.
on the 24.h day Of July. This convcn.
ton assembled in mass, ngreeably ~ the
call, and in large numbers from the
county Of Bennington. That conven-
ton appointed committee to rcpor, to
them the name Of some one for their
Qualification" a. a candidate. The
committee reported the name Of A. l..
Miner, Esq. Of Manchester. The re-
port WAS not acceptable TO the conven.
ton. They refused to ratify il, aud laid
the report Of their committee on the
table. IL seems that strong majority
Of the towns in Bennington county, and
Of the people assembled in convention,
were in favor Of the nomination Of A.
p. Lyman. Esq, Of bennington. and
that on the report of the committee be-
ing laid on the table, a motion was i'm
media,ely made to nominate him in
mass, but Mr. Lyman, who was present,
refused to accept such nomination, and
therefore. the conveniion without taking
any further action adjourned without
day.
The first observation to be made up
on these proceedings, is, that there was
evidently no candidate nominated. l
have seen il claimed in a wing newspa.
per that Mr.. Miner is TO be treated AS
having been nominated, by the conven-
ton on the ground that it is the usage
Of such conventions 10 adopt the report
Of their nominating committee. Blu, is
it the usage Of wing conventions to
leave the report of their committee
without action upon III 1t certainly is
not the usage of wing conventions, to
appoint n nominating committee, and
then dissolve leaving the committee to
make and publish u nomination. The
committee uniformly reports to the body
that raised them, and the question is
there taken in convention, upon accept
ing the report and confirming the nom
ination. If the report Of the commit
tee is approved, information OF the nom
ination is given to the candidate, and if
he be present he signifies in a speech,
or otherwise his acceptance or refusal
OF the nomination, no such proceed
ings were had upon the report of the
committee at Manchester. but the con-
vention by laying the report upon the
table expressly refused to approve and
ratify it.
On the other hand it is claimed to be
the usage of the wing party of the dis
trict to adopt us their candidate the per-
son presented by the wings CT the coun-
ty in which he resides. This was done
: when Mr.. Foot was proposed by the
wings in attendance at the convention
from Rutland County, in the case of
: our present representative, Mr.. Henry,
on the preference of the County Of
: Windham being shown TO have been
expressed in his favor at their previous
county convention-upon this usage,
MIR. Lyman should be treated a. the
nominee of the convention at Manches-
ter.
There was, however, no nomination
of either Mr.. Miner or Mr.. Lyman,
and all that can be said by the friends
D of Mr.. Miner is that the convention
ought to have approved of the report
OF the committee and nominated him,
and by the friends of Mr.. Lyman, that
the convention ought TO have accepted
him as the candidate presented by the
/. county from which the nominee was by
4. common consent to be taken.
Upon the principle upon which the
= Manchester convention was called and
constituted, Mr.. Lyman, if he had &C.
cepted the nomination Of the conven-
ton in mass, would have been the reg
ular nominee of the wings of this dis.
trict. But as their would doubtless
have been complaints Of unfairness in
the proceedings, ! am not disposed to
say he judged wrong in declining the
i. nomination, especially as l understand
he had always been in favor Of a dele
gate convention--and having declined
il, and the report Of the committee in
favor Mr.. Miner having been disap-
proved by the convention, their whole
proceedings whatever we may think
they ought to have been, are to be treat.
! ed as abortive and a nudity.
The difficulty at the Manchester con-
vention, evidently arose from the i'm.
proper basis on which il was called and
constituted. Where The territory is 90
:. small that journey may be made from
all parts Ut il, TO aud from the place of
the convention in one day, as in the case
OF single county, there is probably
: little objection to a mass convention
But where the territory is too large TO
admit Of such convenient access TO q
: convention, as in the case Of this Con.
gressional district, there is q liability
On the one hand that the wishes of the
district may be overcome by full at
tendance from the vicinity, and IN
equal danger on the other that the wish.
es OF distant parts Of the district may