New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1850-10-28

q
suauee of two respective Calls by two respective Wing
Committees each styling themselves and claiming to be
the REGULAR WING Committee ofthe Ward Such being the
case the only why decide the question was to decide 1t
upon purely popular Democratic grounds namely hume
rica representation Upon this ground alone was my vote
and that of Of my colleagues cast for the Delegation
which admitted, and on no other.
The members Of the respective Delegations from me
Second Ward with exception, were entire strangers 10
me- and then knew nothing and now Know nolhihs OF he
sentiments any them nregardto topics which are no"
trust Sr you will give this explanation place in your
columns and thus set matters right IN regard 10 Tue motives
attributed TO the one' majority Yours &c c,
One OF THE JUDICIARY CONVENTION.
Remarks.
Although we have no fear of his con-
yincing any body else, we shall not allow
our correspondent to swindle himself into
the belief that he meant to give correct
vote in the Second Ward case. He knows
great deal better and we mean to make
him confess it.
The following primary and vital facts in
the case have been repeatedly stated IN
our columns, and have not been denied
are not now questioned by our correspond
emit:
|. There were rival claims to seats from
the secoad Ward in the present Wing
General Communicative full Delegations
presenting themselves and claiming to be
admitted
2. The General Committee sent these
rival Delegations back to the Wing elect
ors of the Ward, appointed Day Elec-
ton. and took care that Inspectors of each
party should hold it, so as to have de-
cision made from which there could be no
grounds Of appeal.
3. That Election was fairly held, sharply
contested, and resulted in the triumph of
the Kelly or sayre party.
a. The General Committee thereupon
admitted James Kelly and associates as
Delegates from the Second Ward, pub
Hshed their names (and no others) on its
roll as members from the Second Ward,
and inserted in its book the name Of john
N. SAYrE as Chairman of the Wing Ward
Committee of the Second Ward.
All this stands confessed And there
is no disputing the fact that the election
for Delegates to the several Nominating
Committees called by the recognized Ward
Committee resulted in the unanimous cleo
ton of James Kelly, &c. to the Judicial
and James H. Welsh and associates to the
Congressional Convention.
Now, acho aoas entitled to call tho Second
Ward Melting for the choice Of Nominating
Committees That is the vital question.
When the General Committee issued its
Call for such meeting and gave the Ward
Committee power to appoint Inspectors,
fix OF alter the time, place, &c. did it or
could it mean any other Ward Committee
than that whose Chairmans name is re-
corded in its book ! Does this question ad-
nit of two answers
But another meeting acas called, and WaS
held, at different time and place, by
body also claiming to be Second Ward
Wing Committee. Well: what Of it?
The General Committee had issued no re-
script to any such Committee authorized
it to hold no meeting, appoint no inspectors.
1t had no more power to call meeting
which should in any manner commit or
bind the Wings of the Second Ward than
the Clerk of Fulton Market had. That
Clerk could hold an election any day and
poll FIVE hundred votes if he cared to have
so many. What would it all amount to I!
All the Benson meeting polled 1876
votes, while the 'Sayre only polled l24.
What of it? Do you seriously mean to
contend that if some unauthorized body had
called a Wing meeting last Monday IN
your Ward, and polled swill-pall full of
votes thereat, that your right to seat, be-
ing duly elected under the call of the re-
cognized Wing Ward Committee, would
have been at all affected thereby Have
we got down to the Dorr level, so that
majority of votes obtained anywhere, any
how, and from anybody, is to be held con-
elusive on the Wings of Ward
The Judiciary Convention itself answered
this question in the case of the Sixth Ward