Richmond daily times. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1853, 1852-05-05
THE TWO-THIRDS RULE.

1t seems to be very generally conceded that the
friends of Gen. Cass will have majority in the
National Democratic Convention, and that moth
ing but the readoption of the two-thirds rule can
defeat the nomination of their favorite. The De-
mocracy of Virginia, in their late Convention,
took occasion to declare in very explicit terms
their preference for this rule of proceeding, and
will no doubt strenuously insist upon adherng to
it. Their political salvation, far this State is
concerned, is staked upon the issue, for they do
not hesitate to admit that they cannot bear the
weight of Gen. Cass through another campaign
without imminent danger of being crushed to the
earth.
On the otherhand, it is reasonable to anticipate
that the supporters of Gen. Cass in the Conven-
ton will resist the adoption of the twothirds rule,
and if they shall happen to constitute majority
of that body, cannot what is to prevent
them from attaining their object. The preim-
nary question whether the Convention will adopt
or discard the two-thirds rule will be determined
by majority vote, and if. as is anticipated, the
friends of Gen. Cass shall be in the majority, it is
evident that they will have the game in their own
hands, and may establish any rule of voting that
shall best suit their purposes. The time honored
usages of the Democratic party will doubtless be
appealed to by the partsans of the other aspirants
in favor of the twothirds principle, but Democra-
cy is progressive, and its proudest boast is that it
scorns the traditions of the past and holds folly
the wisdom of its ancestors. Progress is the law
of its being and even the plea that the wo-thirds
rule had its origin in the palmy days of Jackson
ian Democracy, and was associated with all the
Of hat olo II
from violation, if the expediency of the hour de-
manded its repeal.
But this requisition Of twothirds of the votes to
make nomination, has, in times past, encounter
ed violent opposition at the hands of portion of
the Democratic party. In the Democratic Con-
vention of 1848, the principle was vehemently
denounced by certain members of that body as at
WARMTH the Democratic creed, and large vote was
given against its adoption. Arguments will not be
wanting to the Cass men going to show that this
rule is arbitrary, tyrannical, and aevariance with
the true principles of Democracy. The right of
the majority to rule, and the duty of the minority
to submit to the will of that majority, fairly ex-
pressed we have always heard was one of the fun
danental articles of the Democratic creed. But
the Democratic usage, in the choice ola candidate
for the Presidency is an anomalous exception to
the application of that principle, for which we
have never heard any satisfactory reason assigned
We never hear of the adoption of the two-thirds
rule by stheDemocracy in their State District
Conventions. In these, the old rule that the ma
Jority must govern, is invariably established and
submitted to, and the application of different
principle in the choice of candidate for the Pre-
sidency, principle which virtually puts the rul-
ing power ia the hands of the minority, furnishes
one Of those beautiful specimens of Democratic
consistency with which the history of that party
so plensifully abounds.