The Jackson standard. [volume] (Jackson C.H., Ohio) 1847-1888, 1868-07-02

10 give pleuSeJ III person OF Dy his
friends, to support the nominees ofthe
Convention before that body would con
slider the prOpriety of his nomination.
Both the motion by Mr.. DuHadway,
and the rule reported by the Committee,
are new to me in Democratic Conven-
tions. | agree with Mr.. DuHadway,
that an assembly to choose delegates is
more properly an election than con-
vention. Who ever heard tell of such
motion as he made, at any primary
election of our party?
What is convention, in the sense
in which it is used by political parties
| regard it as an agreement or contract,
between two or more candidates, of the
same, or similar political principles, for
the same Office. When there is but
one candidate, in the same party at the
same time for the same office, it is more
properly a ratification meeting, in
which the persons assembled, for them
selves and for their constituents, for
mally express their approval. But in
a convention, no man, be he delegate
or not, except the candidate, is party
to the contract, any more than jury
man is to the suit he is sworn to hear
and help to determine.
Conventions came in vogue because
partisan aspirants for political favors,
discovered that it is, an omen of un-
pleasant results for two or more per-
sons of the same party to run for the
same Office. This being the case, it is
desirable, when there are numerous can
didates, that the different political di-
visions of territory, should select their
delegates and send them as jurors to
convention, to adjudge and execute the
contracts between the candidates. =
The contract, then, is an agreement
between the candidates, that the one
who shall receive so many votes of
delegates as may be agreed upon, shall
be the candidate for tie office, and that
all other candidates for nomination
shall abstain from seeking the favor of
votes for themselves, as against the reg
ular nominee of the convention. But
these other candidates do not obligate
themselves to vote for the nominee.
The candidate, who does so bind him
self, has sold his vote 1t seems to me
any other construction of convention
is illegitimate. The people have law
full right to peaceably assemble for legit-
innate purposes. A man is presumed
innocent until he is proven guilty; so,
upon the same principle it is highly
proper that men should look upon a
convention as peaceable assembling
until it appears otherwise. Therefore,
the candidates, who presented their
names to that convention, in accord
ance with an implied contract that none
of them should ask for the votes of the
Democrats of this county, except those
nominated, were compelled, by that
convention, to change their contract,
and submit to new, unlawful, and anti
Democratic additions to their former
implied contract The convention that
undertakes to bribe candidate, with
ballots, to vote for its favorites, has as
plainly violated the law, as he who
gives money to his neighbor for voting
for certain candidates. DuIIadway's
motion asked men to sell out their
Votes-to whom they knew not--for
the blessed privilege of voting under
that august body, the Central Com
mittee, whose instructions to the pri-
mary meeting, as construed by Du
Hallway, were as Interchangeable as the
laws Of the Medes and Persians The
rule in the convention asked men to
sell out their votes, in advance, in
pretty much the same manner. In this
way, have men been pledged, in the
presence of many, and deprived of
their invaluable right of making a free
and unbiased choice of candidates.
Is this right? Is it lawfulg Is it
Democratic7 Right, Law, and Dem
ocracy, would have men unbiased and
untrammeled, enjoying all the liberty
and freedom, compatible with the
peace, prosperity, and happiness of the
country, in voting, as well as in other
matters and things. He who votes for
a man, solely because that man belongs
to his party, is not, by any means, an
unprejudiced voter. Heis party bound
-entangled in the meshes Of the un-
serupulous demagogues, who play the
lash over his back whenever he refuses
to do their bidding. The man who
votes, unscratched, a party ticket,
which does not suit him, may be very
ardent Democrat, but in so voting he
does an anti Democratic act lido not
see, therefore, the propriety of such
motions, and such rules, in Democratic
conventions, as those heretofore refer
red to. So far as l know, they are of
new birth in the Democratic partyi--
and | believe they are of Know-Noth-
ing origin. Why should Democrats
embrace this bastard offspring of par
ty that died, in the first year Of its ex-
istence, from the effects of its own rank
corruption| N ga '1Gi.
The convention, however, became
much more Democratic as the hour Of
its dissolution was drawing to close
After a great majority of the delegates
had left the convention--the nomina-
tions being made, a Central Committee
appointed, and delegates chosen to go
to the Congressional conventional. T.
M, through Mr.. DuHadway, brought
up his threatened resolution of Gin