Semi-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1853-18??, 1860-06-30
The Baltimore Conventions.

to committee chosen by the delegations from the
different States, and on the fourth day. after long
and patient investigation, the committee made two
reports.
The majority report recommended the admission
of the delegates from Mississippi, who had been
appointed without opposition to go to Baltimore
They were admtted-yeas 250 nays %; but on
account of the rejection of certain delegates from
other Southern States they declined to take their
seats
The majority also recommended the rejection of
the Yancey delegates from Alabama, because they
had been instructed to repair to Richmond and take
part in hostile Convention, though accredited"
to Baltimore. They were rejected and the new
delegation from Alabama admitted by yeas 14SA,
nays 1O14
The majority also recommended the rejection of
the old delegation from Louisiana because they had
been reappointed by the old State Convention which
had adjourned sine die. They regarded the pro-
ceedings of the old Convention possessing no Vi
taty, and gave the preference to the delegates ap
pointed by new Convention held at Donaldson
ville fresh from the people. The Donaldsonville
Convention was composed of delegates from twenty
one parishes out of thirty-nine, including New Or
leans. The old delegation was rejected and the
admitted-yeas 1853, nays 90.
The majority also recommended that both sets of
delegates from Georgia be admitted, on the ground
that the regularity of both was involved in doubt
and because both were regarded representing the
opinions and sentiments of the Democracy of Geor-
gia. The resolution recommending their admission
was rejected-yeas 1861, nays AS. After which,
motion of Mr.. Church, of New York, the dele
cation of which II. L. Bcnning was chairman were
admitted to seats. This was in accordance with the
report of the minority the resolution of the maj ORR
ty having been rejected; but the Georgia delega-
ton, account of the rejection of certain delegates
from other Southern States declined to take their
seats
The majority also recommended that all the claim
ants from Arkansas be admitted to seats. The mi
norty report, recommending the admission of those
headed by R. W. johnson, was adopted-yeas 1S2,
nays GO; and the second branch of the resolution of
the majority, admitting Mcssrs. Bradley, Hooper
and Cross, rejected-yeas 49, nays 1901
The majority also recommended the admission Of
the Texas delegates and the resolution pasSed-yeaS
$50, nays 81; but they refused to come in on the
same grounds on which Mississippi and Georgia re-
manned out.
The majority made no provision for admitting
Florida because the delegates appointed TO the
Richmond Convention, and not expressly accredited
to Baltimore.
The majority recommended the admission Of
Messrs Bayard and Whitley of Del who seeded at
Charleston. This recommendation was based on
the fact that they had been regularly appointed to
Baltimore.
The majority also recommended that X. S. Chat
fee alternate delegate from Massachusetts, he al
lowed 70 hold his seat against B. F. Hallett the
principal delegate, who did not attend as Mr.. Chat
fee did at Charleston; and that John c. Falon, of
Missouri, an alternate who attended at Charleston,
should have the seat instead of johnson B. Gardy,
the principal delegate The resolution excluding
Messrs Hallet and Gardy, and admitting MesSrs.
Chatfee and Fallon, was adopted, years 1884, nays
112.
Soon after this action BY the Convention a con-
siderable number of delegates from the States of
Virginia, North Carolina California, Maryland,
Pennsylvania Oregon, Minnesota, Tennessee, Mas
sachuSetts, Kentucky, and Missouri, seeded from
the Convention, and, with delegates from Texas,
Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi
and Georgia, proceeded to organize new Conven-
ton in Maryland Institute Hall. Mr.. Cushing, who
had left the chair of the old Convention elected
President of the new Convention, and on taking the
chair said he resumed" his seat President of
the Democratic National Convention!
We find III the Washington Constitution the
names of the delegates in the new ConventAn.-
They number $50. A full Convention should con-
tain COG members being for each Electoral vote
We have no means of calculating the number Of
those who remained in the senior or old Convention,
except by doubling the vote cast in that body. That
would make at least Sss. But as that with $50 in
the new Convention, would make u more than the
whole number, COG, we assume that there were $40
delegates in the old Convention.
The Front Street or old Convention, it is well
known nominated Stephen A. Douglas for President,
and Benjamin Fitzpatrick for Vice President; and
the Maryland Institute or new Convention nominal
ed John C. Breckenridge for President, and Gen.
Joseph Lane for Vice President. On the second
ballot the vote for Douglas follows: Maine z,
New Hampshire 5, Vermont 5, Massachusetts, 10,
Rhode Island 4, Connecticut 81, New York 50, New
Jersey q, Pennsylvania 10, Maryland q, Virginia
8, North Carolina l, Alabama g. Louisiana 6, Ar
kansas II, Missouri H. Tennessee 8, Kentucky 8,
Ohio %, Indiana Is, Illinois II, Michigan 6, Wis
consin 5, Iowa 4, Minnesota Total 1914. Thir-
teen votes were cast for Guthrie and Breckenridge,
making the whole vote 1914 The nomination
afterwards made unanimous showing as claimed
by the Washington States, 2l2t votes for Douglas,
being 1Ot more than two-thirds of the whole Col
lege. The vote for Breckenridge and Lane in the
new Convention was as follows: Vermont ], Massa-
chusetts g. New York 2, Pennsylvania 4, Maryland
A., Virginia III, North Carolina 81, Georgia TO-
Florida 8, Alabama 9, Louisiana 6, Mississippi Z,
Texas 4, Arkansas 4, Missouri /, Tennessee o.
Kentucky Al, Minnesota l, California 4 Oregon g.