Knoxville daily chronicle. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1870-1882, 1872-05-04
THE ROW OF THE NEW YORK DELEGA-
TION.

4
Twenty-Five Delegates oppose Greeley.
To determine the strength of Greeley in
New York, it is well enough to note how
he stood in his own delegation. The New
York delegation entire, be it remembered,
is but small faction from the Republicans
oft he State. Even of this faction twenty
two opposed him. Here are the proceed
ings: 'SHsa 5000 sal'a tfAa"'a
The New York delegation met Wednes-
day afternoon and it proved to be very
lexciting. About a hundred and twenty
| five members were present Waldo
| HutchingS was called to the chair. John
| COchrane, from the committee on the sub
Ijectreported.
General Cochran, from Committee, re-
| ported a resolution in favor of casting
! the vote of the State solid for Greeley.
| A warm discussion ensued, chiefly upon
| the question whether this was to bind the
| delegation to cast the entire vote all the
way through for Greeley. Some delegates
| denied the right of this assemblage to so
| bind the votes of the delegates; others
| urged that the assemblage was representa-
| tive of the people of New York, and had
| the same power to bind the delegates it
should choose as original primaries or eau
cuses have to instruct their chosen repre-
sentatives. -. r-.n ..rrt trrrr.r.r :.
Ex-Judge Sheldon, of Rochester, pre-
sented a strong argument against tying
hands, but would submit to the order of
the majority. [Applause.l
Mr.. Brown, of the Rochester Democrat,
would strike out the second resolution all
| after the words "retire for consultation"
| thus leaving the delegates free to follow
| individual preferences after ten shall have
united in the call to retire.
Mr. Cochran argued the resolution al
ready meant that.
A delegate-Then why not say so in
terms? .#.#s# 10 f Y / .
Mr.. Brown withdrew his amendment.
Mr.. Lloyd while expressing kind feel
ing toward Mr.. Greeley, and a willing
ness to yield TO the majority so far as one
| or two mplimentary votes for him, was
not in favor of him for the Presidential
| nomination, because, if elected he would
ably advocate and support a policy which
the speaker unalterably opposed as unwise
| for the country. He was of course un-
derstood to refer to the policy of protec-
| ton. For this reason the speaker was
opposed to the adoption Of the pending
resolution, and also because its effect was
| to assert what was not true, tO-wit: That
the delegates here are unanimous on this
question.
He had been urged by one whose fame
was continental to resist this as he would
any other form of tyranny, and he stated
that in the Ohio delegation the single
vote found there for Greeley was
! to be respected, and the chairman
would cast it so long as the delegate
so desired. He had felt it duty thus to
protest against what he saw was the de-
termination of the majority here, though
necessarily it would result in defeating the
| formally expressed wish of his Congress
sional District that he should represent
them in the delegate convention.
A resolution was then introduced to vote
solid for Greeley until twenty requested
| to withdraw for a consultation, i'll which
event the vote shall be cast as the majority
of the delegation shall direct, provided the
| convention shall not direct q different
method of procedure.
! This prOviso was added at the suggestion
of Judge Selden.
| The chair put the question to vote, and
said that it seemed carried. A division
was called, a decided majority ranging
themselves in the affirmative The chair
announced that the resolution was adopt
ed, amid cries of "cOuntU count
which were UNDECIDED. A scene of con-
| fusion eIsued.
Finally, an appeal from the decision of
the chair. A count was had and showed
ninety-nine in favor of the resolution to
| twenty-five against. The first resolution
| then adopted. A recess taken until
| Tonight