Gazette and sentinel., 1860-09-01

pN>CbNus IL Is tOl true llloL Tue SnulTIldn
notified the delegates that those who did not
object should be counted as voting for the res
]olution. No published proceeding of that
Convention puts any such remark into his
mouth. On the contrary, every published pro-
ceeding, including those published at the time
in the Baltimore, Washington, and New York
papers, reported by different reporters, con-
clusively demonstrates that he gave utterance
TO no such language. But, even if he did, it
was not in his power, and was not within the
scope of his duties as a presiding officer, to
dictate to delegates what course they should
pursue, rs to bind them by his mere ipSe dirt.
Each delegate had the right to vote, or not to
vote, as to him seemed proper; and Of this he
was the sole Judge, answerable for his course
TO his constituency alone. The Convention
had decided that, in accordance with the es-
tablished usages of the party, II required two
thirds (2O2 votes of the electoral votes to non-
mate. The highest vote at any time attained
by Mr.. Douglas was lS1! J, and the whole num-
Der east 1876. How were 202 votes for Mr..
Douglas TO be manufactured out of l9G votes
all told, III Of which were cast against him ?
Eighteen delegates remained in the Conven-
ton as spectators, taking no part whatsoever
in lis deliberations, and expreSsiyely declaring
that they were not bound by. its decision. Va
rious devices were tried to compel these Is del
egates to vote. Mr.. Church of New York,
had offered a resolution declaring Mr.. Douglas
the nominee, when be had received only 1874
votes. We quote the following proceedings
which then ensued:
THE question was loudly called for.
MIR. Jones of Pennsylvania, said he was
ready to support the nominee of the Conven-
ton when he shall be nominated by the rules
of the Democratic party. At Charleston it
was determined that two-thirds of all the cleo
toral college was necessary TO a nomination.
alt was objected that debate was not in or
der.
THE President (Mr. Todd so ruled.
"Mr. Jones raised o question of order
not be repealed except ON one days notice.
MIR. Church explained the action at
Charleston, and said his resolution was in
tended to change the ruled instruction adopted
at Charleston. New York had come here to
pour oil on the troubled waters, and had faith
fully endeavored to do so. They had yielded
everything except personal honor to heal the
divisions which existed. He proceeded tocon-
denim the action of the seeding delegates.
Mr.. W. $! Cuttings Of Maryland. entered
a protest against the propositions of Mr..
Church Of New York. A rule WAS adopted at
Charleston that two-thirds of all the votes of
the electoral college was required to nominate
a candidate for President.
The Chair explained, that at Charleston the
then President was instructed not to declare
any one nominated unless he received two
thirds OF, the votes of the electoral college,
(202 votes.)
MIR. Cuttings said there were two-thirds of
the electoral college here, and if gentlemen
voted who declined to vote, Douglas would be
nominated by a two-third vote. He hoped
there would be more ballots to see what gen.
tlemen would do, and that Mr.. Church would
withdraw his resolution. l,s Do
" Cries of That's it-that's it-yes-yes.'
MIR. Hose Of Virginia, said he hoped there
would be no ballots, and if those gentlemen
who declined TO vote did not vote, he should
treat them as out of the Convention. 4
Mr.. Church then withdrew his resolution
till another ballot was had" Fl. sf RI "a
Yet, after this notice served upon these Is
delegates. they again refused to vote; and it is
simply ridiculous to say that the President
could record their votes as cast in favor of the
resolution. Mr.. Church boldly declared that
the "7Ts0LutioR 1cds intended TO ehrnge the rue
OF instruction adopted Mt Charleston requir-
ing a two-thirds vote to nominate the candi-
date sslt r..f .' F sli
OF the 10 delegates who remained in the
Convention ms spectators, five were from Ken
lucky, six from Delaware, and seven from
Missouri. t.ti
The FIVE delegates from Kentucky filed n
written protest, in which they stated that
though they remained in the Convention, they
" ,niH not participate in its dellberatlons, nor
! hold ourselves or our constituents bound By its
action. but leave both at full liberty to act as
future circumstances may dictate - (signed
by q. A. Caldwell, W. w. Williams, w.
Bradley. Samuel B. Field, and Thos. j..
Y9ung.D 800.
Mr.. Salisbury of Delaware, announced. in
behalf of the six delegates from his State who
remained in the Convention, but refused to
vote. that sin future they should decline to
Eote. reserying to themselves the right TO act
hereafter as they deemed proper"
The seven delegates from Missouri gave no
tice that they would remain in the Conven-
ton, but would take no part in its delibera.
tions. And these are the votes upon which
this committee base their two-thirds vote fOl
Mr.. Douglas!l tf - llvi
no OPPORTUNITY GIVEN TO DISSENT IRON
THE RESOLUTION DOMINATING Mr.. DOUGLAS
But even admitting that the President die
give, notice that those who did not objec
should be counted in favor Of the resolution
\ even admitting the proposition that his mer,
ipse diyit had the power TO bind the delegate
who did not dissent, even in the face of tbei
declarations that they would not vote we nov
proceed to show that no opportunity was af
forded to any delegate to object TO the passage
of the resolution. The extract OF the pro
ceedings which we have heretofore quoted
shows that debate upon this resolution was de
cided to be out of order and, under thi
ruling, Mr.. Jones, of Pennsylvania, who ros
to enter his dissent, was unceremoniousl,
gagged. Having thus closed their mouths
L Il: .;a.no nnnAonla that hooauao thar Al