Bradford reporter. [volume] (Towanda, Pa.) 1844-1884, 1855-11-10

his friends seeing no chance for him in the de-
mocratic national convention, he got up an
| individual or collateral one for himself-to
meet at the same time and place but of this
hereafter. This chapter belongs to the liz
triglle against Mr. Van Buren,. uT-.fv4ss 4
The Convention meta motley assemblage,
called deinocratic-many selfappointed, or APP
pointed upon management or solicitation-ma-
ny alternative SubStitutes-many members Oh
Congress, in violation of the principle which
condemned the Congress Presidential caucuses
in lS24-some n"ullificrs, and an Immense out
side coucoursc. Texas land and scrip specula-
tors were largely in it, and more largely on the
outside A considerable number were in favor
of no particular candidate, but in pursuit OF Of
fee for themselves-infeXible against any one
from whom they thought they would not get it
and ready to go for any one from whom they
thought they could. Almost all were under
Instructions for Mr.. Van Buren,, and could not
have been appointed where such instructions
| were given, except in the belief that they would
| be obeved. The business of undOing instruc-
tons had been attended with but poor success
in no instance having been done by the i'll
s~tructing body, or its equivalent. Two hun
| dred and s~ixty-six delegates were present
South Carolina absent and it was Immediate
" seen that after all the packing and intrigu-
inc, the majority was still for Mr.. Van Buren,.
II was seen that he would be nominated on the
first ballot, if the majority was to govern. TO
prevent that, u movement was necessary, aud
was made. In the morning of the first day,
before the vcrifcation of the authority of the
delegatcs-before Observation-Disclosures prayers
and with only a temporary chairman-a mo-
49,. 1900, ,,,l,@+o olN~+ 4In tura +IIrl, ,,Io
that is to saay, the rule which required a con
c~urrence of two-thirdS to effect a nomination.
That rule had been used in the two previous
nominating conyentiOns-not to thwart q ma
jority, but to strengthen it the argument be-
ing that the result would be the same, the con-
v~ention being nearly unanimous that the two
thirds would be cumulative, and give more
weight TO the nomination. The precedent was
claimed, though the reason had failed ; aud the
effect might now to defeat the majority instead
of adding to its voice. Men of reflection and
foresight objected to this rule when previously
used, as being in violation of a fundamental
principle-opening the door for the minority to
rule-encouraging intrigue and combination
and leading to corrupt practices whenever there
should be Il design to defeat the popular will.
These objections. were urged in 1882 and in
1886, and answered by the reply that the rule
was only adopted by each convention for itself,
and made no odds in the result and now they
were answered with "precedents." \ strenu-
Gus contest took place over the adoption of this
rule-all seeing that the fate of the nomination
depended upon it. Mr.. Romulus NJ. Saunders
Of North Carolina, was its mover. Mcssrs.
Robert j. Walker, and Hopkins, of Virginia,
its most active supporters and precedent the
stress Of their argument. MeSsrs. Morton, of
Massachusetts Clifford, of Maine Dickinson
and Butler, Of New York Medary, of Ohio;
and Alexander Kayser, of Missouri, were its
principal opponents their arguments were
those of principle, and the inapplicability of
precedents founded on cases where the two
thirds vote did not defeat, but strengthened
the majority.
The rule was adopted, and by the help of
delegates instructed to vote for Mr.. Van Blu
rem, and who took that method of betraying
their trust while affecting to fulfil it. The bo-
dy then organized, and the balloting commenc-
ed, all the states present except South Carroll
ma, which stood off, although she had come into
it at the preceding convention, and cast her
vote for Mr.. Van Buren,. Two hundred and
s~iXty-siX electoral votes were represented, of
which 1874 would be the majority, and IL the
twO-thirds. Mr.. Van Buren, received l5I on
the first ballot, gradually decreasing at each
successive vote until the seventh, when it stood
at 80, probably about the true number that
remained faithful to their constituents and their
pledges. OF those who fell off it was seen
that they chiefly consisted of those protesting
friends who had supported the two-thirds rule,
and who now got an excuse for their intended
d~csertiOn and premeditated violation of ~instruc-
tons, in being able to aIlcge the impossibility
of electing the man to whom they were pledged.
At this state of the voting, a member from
Ohio, (Mr. Miller moved a resolve, that ar.
Van BufeR, la I4g rcclred q majority of the
rotcs on the first ballet, 'oaS duly nominated, and
shouH be so dedared. This motion was an I'M
expected step, and put delegates under the ne
ccSSity of voting direct on the majority princi-
pie, which lies at the foundation of all popular
elections, and at the foundation of the Presi-
dental election itself, as prescribed by the
constitution. That instrument only requires a
majority of the electoral votes to make an cleo
ton of President this intriguing rule requires
him to get two-thirds before he is competent to
receive that majority. The motion raised a
storm. 1t gave rise to a violent, diSOrderly,
furious and tumultuary discussion. Mr.. Is.
here makes extracts from some of the speeches
amongst others Of Messrs. Brewster, Hinch-
man, Brcdon and Frazer, of the PENNSYLVANIA
delegation.
The elimination and recrimination in the
Pennsylvania delegation arose from division
amongst the delegates in some other delega-
tons the disregard of Instructions was unani-
NOUS, and there was no one to ccnsure another,
as in Miss ,ssippi. The Pennsylvania delegation
may be sal to have decided the nomination.
They were instructed to vote for Mr.. Van Blu
rem, and did so, but they divided on the two
thirds rule, and gave a majority of their votes
for it, that it to say, Ii votes but as ID was
not IA majority of 26, one delegate was got to
stand aside and then the vote stood Is to II.
The Virginia delegation, headed by the most