Daily national Democrat., 1860-08-17
The TwO.thirds Rule.

The Democratic party established The two
thirds rule in thcir National Convention IN
1882. Gen. jackson was then the nominee
of the People. without regard to any Con-
yention. lie refused to allow his name To be
used in a Convention. But 1t was deemed
advisable to nominate a candidate for Vice
President by the delegates of the people.
Martin Van Buren had been rejected as Min
istor to England by Wing Senate, and he
was named for the second place on the Presi-
Dental ticket The National Convention es.
tablished the two thirds rule, and under it
nominated him. In 1886 he was nominated
for President under the same rule. In 1910
re-nominated under that rule, and was de-
feated by Gen. Harrison. In 1914, the rule
was again re-established, and Van Buren,
who had a majority of the votes Of the Con.
vention, was defeated by the rule, and Presi-
dent Polk was nominated. In lSiS Gen
Cass was nominated under the rule, and in
1852, he was defeated by it, and Gen Pierce
was nominated. In 1856, Mr.. Buchanan was
nominated under the rule. In 1860, after
the rule had been regularly adoped, por-
tion of the Southern members having seeded
from the Convention, it was still resolved to
adhere to it-Gen. Cushing having ruled
that it required two-thirds of the whole
number, and not two-thirds of those actually
present, as had been decided ty Andrew
Stephenson of Virginia, in u previous Con-
vention, to secure nomination. The Con-
venton then without making a nomination,
adjourned to Baltimore and there, on the
second ballot Mr.. Douglas received 1914
votes. 1t was, at this time, on motion Of Mr..
Clark, of Missouri, that the vote in favor of
his nomination was made unanimous, the
body ut that time containing 2l2 delegates
and giving him clear majority OF all the
votes in the Electoral College.-St. Louis
Republican.
The Seceders in this State are still harp
| ing about the two third rule and continue
to assert that Douglas did not receive two
thirds of the Electoral vote. No longer
ago than last Wednesday, the San Francisco
Herald made the statement that there were
but l943 votes in the Convention which
nominated Mr. Douglas. We thought it was
well known by this time, that there remain
ee in the Convention after the Seceders left,
2l2 delegates, and that on motion, they made
the nomination of Mr.. Douglas unanimous
| 'tVt " Ut'tyNtt tV't'y ''V' w III NV pNNNNNi'
pretend to say that nomination made unan
imous on motion, is not fair2 We point them
to nominations made in Democratic State
Conventions, where it has frequently been
the case that candidates have been nominated
by acclamation and not by ballot. Mr. Doug
las received 1914 votes. As the case theI
stood, the squad of boilers having left, and
that being the regular Convention, he was
fairly nominated But when in that Con-
vention his vote was made unanimous by 2li
delegates (ten more than the required num-
ber) the regularity of the nomination cannot
be disputed with any show of reason. Nice
| fellows, the Seeeders are, to question the
regularity of that nomination By admit
ting spurious delegates, they managed tc
cast los votes in their Convention. Lee
them show by what right they admitted thes'
spurious delegates, before talking about reg
nlarity.
Those men who cast the votes for the ab-
sent California delegates had about as much
business there as they would have at Chicago
They were there in direct violation of in
structions from the State Convention.