The Evansville daily journal. [volume] (Evansville, Ia. [i.e. Ind.]) 1848-1862, 1860-05-11
NEWS BY TELEGRAPH.
BY THE Z. W. LINE.
Exclusively for the Journal.
BALTIMORE CONVENTION
Harmonious Proceedings.
Bell for President and Everett for
Vice President.
MUCH ENTHUSIASM.

3 tiV IiOuSlbi iittAi utaiitl " bdliOt lO-
night. They are more numerous than the
supporters Of any other candidate.
! Mr.. Bell is second. The contest between
them is animated. Mr.. SIcI.ain Will have
some votes bgt all idea Of nominating him,
or any one else with reference to Chicago
dropped. Two thirds Of the y. Y. deIega-
ton is for Mr.. Houston. They are for
Mr.. Everett for Vice President
The Penn. delegation is divided between
Bell ana Houston; so is the South generally
Kentucky being unanimous for Houston.
1t is predicted that he will be nominated at
IN early stage Of the balloting.
No body IS tor Bolts. The attempt to
bring him forward failed.
1890 P. s.---rhe frends.Qf Bell and Me-
Lean are encouraged by diverSions from Mr..
Houston, whose supporters are solnew hat
alarmed at tie platform they having unan-
imOusly agreed 10 report the Union, the
Constitution, The Laws--a platform it is
expected that The Convention viii be salts
fed with.
BALTIMORE, May 10, N Tic Convention
met at 10 O'clock.
The Chair presented letter from Judge
Chambers OF Maryland, expressing regret at
not being able to attend, aud hoping hat Il
wise ard patriotic result would he attained.
Also a telegram from Washington. from "
c. Hayes Fouck of New York, urging
tie Constitution and Washington Farewell
address as "A sufficient platform.
On calling the roll, delegates appeared
from FLORIDA and Rhode Island which
were not reported yesterday.
J. Il. Ingersoll reported fIoIn the commit
tste on business, the result Of their deiibcra-
aticrs, wLicii, he said, was characterized by
great nnanimity and patriotism The re-
port says taat,
Whereas. eNper'snee has demonstrated
thai all Platforms adopted by political
parties, have t!ie effect to mise;ld and 10
cause political divisions by encourag
ing GeogEAphlcL e.-l sectiona parties.
therefore;
Rcsotpe9. That both patriotism and duty
require that they shall recoee:s; no policy
or principles but those resting Or he broai
foundations Of the Constitution Of tha cOUn-
try, The union OF the States, and the enforce
ment Of the Laws Great applause aGG
cheers And that as representatives, OF The
constitutional Union party, and Of tie
country, they pledge themselves to main
tain, profess, and aelend these principles,
thus .4i1rding security 1t home ana abroad,
and socure the blessings of liberty to them
selves and posterty.
Tue resolution was adopted 10y acela-
ulaiou.
Yhey reported another resolution that
t,t-a State should determine for itself The
m0,bs al voting, whether by unit OF other
wise THIS excited considerable discussion.
The miGoSjLy of the delegations contend
ing that as adoption would place them
ut tho mercy Of the lnajorities, and tiua
stifie the expression OF titeir individual pre-
ferences.
MI. Warner ef Massachusetts said he
came here to express the sentiments of his
constituents. The resolution reported from
the committee, was one Of the bold party
tricks to place the Iniuoritiea under the con-
lrol of the lnajorities. If his State had in
structcd him for particular Elan, he would
obey the instructions, but none such had
been given and hc desired that the delegates
should vote in their individual capacity.
Mr. Pierce Of Maryland denied that the
committee had any intention of perpetrnt-
ing party tricks. it was mere question
of cxpedieucy. He thought there was no
intention to smngele the voice the miuorl-
ty In his own delegation, it had been de-
termiued that every vote should be allow
eli to Indicate its preference.
Mr. Partridge OF Mss sustained the report
of the committee.
The question was whether the delegations
shonld determine how the voting was to be
done, or whether the Convention would do
their best to the delegations, as it had been
determined that every voter Should lie.
Mr. Moofehead of North Carolina wanted
each district To have its vote, whether for
Mr.. Houston OF somebody else.
A voice-Beli. [Applause
Mr. Moorehead-l should sny Graham.
! (Appla,ssel-
Mr.. Moorhead continued advocating the
voting by districts ami opposing any at
! tempt To silence the vuicn ot luiuoritieS
Mr. Stevens OF n s. offered an amend
! ment that each 'ielcsa,c Tee entitled to one
! vote
/ Nr. johnson offered an nmcu,ucut-
! That each district hr entitled 10 oae vote
/ Mr. Comegys of Delaware, said his State
! had 2I Congressional Districts and the
adoption of that resolution would deprive
the State Of two votes.
! Mr. Hill OF Georgia, advocated the reso-
luton.
Mr. Brooks Of New York, denied that he
had any intention 10 stihc the voice Of mi
norities He moved the previous question
the resolution of the committee, that each
State al large and each district he entitled
to one vote.
Mr.. atson offered a proYlsO that no deie-
gate he deprived of has individual vote
without his consent.
Mr.. Brooks accepted this amendment. and
withdrew his proviso.
Mr. Rockwell of Connecticut opposed al
lowing States not fully represented to cast
the entire vote for districts that where rep
! resented.
NJ. Murphey OF y. Y. offered subSti-
tute that each State be entitled to as many
votes IS she has Senators and Representa-
tives in Congress, and that each delegate ne
entitled TO one vote.
Mr. Goggin, Of Va, offered resolution
that the Chairman OF each delegation cast
the vote of the State in accordance with the
instructions given By the delegates from the
different districts OF the States When the
State was not fully represented, majority
of the delegation is to determine how the