The western Democrat. [volume] (Charlotte, N.C.) 1852-1870, 1858-03-30
w eStern Democrat.
CHARLOTTE, n. c,
For the Western Democrat.
GUBERNATORIAL.

Mr. EDITOR: correspondent in your issue OF
the 23d inst, posts the books in regard to the
gubernatorial candidates. The only amendment
have to make to it is that Stokes county has since
declared for Mr. Holden, making his VOTE accord
inc to the democratic strength of the counties ex-
pressing preference for him, 10, 1e5. But de-
Sire to note a few other points in the article of
your correspondent.
He seems to take it for granted that the nomi-
nee must get majority of all the votes cast for
Gov, Bragg in 1856 Now If all the counties In
the State are represented in the Convention this
is right; but if there should be some counties not
represented, their strength cannot be counted
The Convention cannot undertake, as a body to
represent any county, Therefore, the proper plan,
il seems to me- is to calculate the democratic
strength of the counties represented, and let a
majority Of that strength determine the nomlna-
ton. The "two-thirds rule" spoken of by your
correspondent, is inapplicable and absurd, if the
vote be taken according to democratic strength.
If it be taken according to representation then
there NAV be some excuse for the twO-thirds rule.
But the vote according to democratic strength is
fair, just and democratic; and so cOmmends itself
to the good sound honest sense of the Masses that
| have no doubt of its adoption. Had your cores
pondent been favorably inclined to either of the
gentlemen whose names prominently before
the people, / presume he would never have men
toned the two-thirds rule" / trust, if his OBJ
iect be to defeat those whom the people prefer,
and to bring forward some candidate not yet brought
to the attention of the people, that he will signay
fail Let the Convention select from those
the people have brought forward.
| desire now to notice only the concluding para
graph of your correspondents article. He says:
"A very interesting question will be whether each
delegate shall have his share of the county vote,
the county shall vote as unit, and according to
the views Of majority Of the delegates Of the
county present"
correspondent, Will be simple enough to raise so
absurd a question before the Convention. 1t
would be far more ridiculous than L" interesting"
In the first place it would take twenty-four hours
hard work, to take tho votes of the delegates of
the whole State in this way. In the second place
it would be unjust to the respective candidates in
the counties that have expressed preference.
Judge Ellis is not entitled to any portion of the
votes of Wake, Orange, Alamance, &c; and Mr.
Holden is not entitled to any portion of the votes
Of Rowan, Davie, Iredell, &c. Counties should be,
and must be units; and majority of the delegates
from each county must govern the vote of the
county. If there is tie, it is set-of This
seems to me the common sense view of the matter
the just and equitable way of settling the ques-
ton. Cutting up the vote of the counties among the
delegates would be impractcable, or at least so
very tedious that it would only be resorted to by
those who had made up their minds to stay week
at Charlotte and to defeat every candidate now
prominent before the people.