Perrysburg journal. (Perrysburg, Wood Co., O. [Ohio]) 186?-1965, 1875-02-19
Tho Convention System = Reply from
% Hirh privafn.V

tion. BY so doing, 1t seems have brought
down on my innocent head the wrath Of
your correspondent OF two weeks ago--a
disappearing grunt from the Sentinel fol-
lowed in last weeks issue Of that paper by
an uncomfortable squirm from some one
whose effort convinces me that be does not
exactly know Just what he wants to say,
but felt certain he must say something.
"Twas ever thus" With so much peda-
gogic knowledge in the world II Is danger
Gus for a seeker after light to ask for infor-
nation. Still l am not going to despair.
What wanted to know was; Whatare the
objections to the Mass convention system
1 had always supposed good men were
chosen--in fact believed it; hence was sur
prised to see = stated that the selections
were chastity made" without proper
care or deliberation "--and especially 10
see that the very men selected by the
Mass convention were the most desirous Of
a change. The inevitable conclusion Of
this seemed to be that the Republican party
had been making improper selections and
those selected were the first to discover it.
Had this complaint Of this Mass Conven.
ton come from private citizens IL would
not have seemed so strange, but coming
from the very men honored by the people
assembled in Mass convention was little
surprising and led me to make my humble
inquiry.
Your correspondent says the failure of
the petitioners to suggest the kind of a
st,fa al O.
thought. But why2 1t seems to me
that the objections to the present system
should not only have been stated but be-
fore we tear down one system some other
and better should be suggested. He is right
in saying that whatever change is made
should be made by the voters in conven-
ton assembled, and he should have added
"in a regular Nominating convention when
full and fair expression can be had"
Not by Special convention, called for the
express purpose and at which only few
interested individuals would be present. !
have no doubt that at a regular Nominating
convention, when only u good attendance
can be secured, any proposition to abol-
ish the Mass convention and substitute
either the Delegate or primary election
system would be voted down by large
majority. But let call for Special con-
vention be made-and this am satisfied is
Tor was) the intention of the prime movers
in the natter--and this proposition could be
easily carried through, as the chances are
only those specially interested in n change
wonld attend. The m .eting would then
be "wieldy" enough to suit the most
fastidious OF the petitioners and once car
ried would of course have to be submit
cd to by the masses. If this were not the
intention of the petitioners (some of thcm)
why were any preliminary steps necessarily
| \ resolution to change the system can
| just as easily be submitted at the next
Nominating convention and acted upon
then and there. Your correspondent saws,
| that petitioners desire that n special Con-
vention be called "to decide whether the
party desires change and what that
change shall be-" NY TRANSLATION of that
would be that q final decision was to be
made at this special convention, but as he
speaks farther along of submitting the prop
osition afterwards to the voters at the
| Spring election or nj the Nominating con-
vention, ! am almost inclined to think he
| is as badly in need of light MS the under
signed. Owing to this | am not surprised
when he says:
"High Private states that the petition is
signed mostly bv "brlie-s, non Republicans
and non re ,i1entS." Inthis he m minifcsts either
| ignorance or an Intention 10 mislead. or ii o
afty slgners of the rettion published in tho
S:nti",l none are boilers. hut nne can he called
a non Republican aud one nonresident"
High Private said nothing OF the kind
| lie did say that some were boilers, and
says so vet. let my "starry" friend
stoop from his celestial height long enough
to read what | did say, and then take
home to himself his gentemanly asser-
ton in the second sentence OF the above
paragraph.
The only objection to the Mass conyen-
ton is, it is too anwieldy," too much
friction about it, and "often very un-
satisfactory in its results" Mark his
words. Oar Mass conventions have " too
much friction" are too "unwieldy :"
hence our prominent men" desire .
change to a system that is more easily
welded" That Isl exactly. Too many
OF the common folks-the rabble-come
out; men who are goOd Republicans
enough and whose votes connt, but they
too often insist upon making their own
choice, and often the result of Mass con-
vention spoils a well-arranged "slate," and
is therefore unsatisfactory in its results. Z"
They prefer the Delegate system, when a
bare majority of a township can select its
delegates, pledged to the interests of par
ticular candidate, and cast the whole vote
OF the township, thereby depriving the
minority OF its fair representation in the
County convention.
You see il is much easier to control the
selection OF townships delegates when n
bare majority can "wield" the power, than
il is to control the vote of that township
under the present system, when every
man receives his fair proportion, even 10
the one-hundredth part of vote. II will
readily be admitted that the Mass con-
vention is rather "unwieldy" at times,
bnt is highly improbable that the Repub-
licans OF the county will insist upon n
change because of its unwieldincss.
Suppose at Mass convention bare ma
jority should send in the full vote of a
township in spite of the protests Of the
minority. You would hear complaints
upon all sides, and the chances are that a
bolt would Immediately take place; vet the
Delegate system contemp'ntes this very
thing. believe every Repub' lean in a
township is entitled TO a full and fair rep
resentation in selecting the candidate lie
is to vote for--that is, entitled to his pro-
portionate vote. But with the Delegate
system a majority fof only one perhaps)
can and will control the vote of that town
ship. Yon will have list of Smiths
friends and Browns friends proposed MS del
egates in the township mecting-one OF the
other is chosen-and the candidate who
fails to get his friends selected as delegates,
gets no support from that township under
the Delegate system. A majority OF the
Republicans of the county may prefer
Smith, yet his failure to get his delegates
from certain townships cannot he nomina-
ted. Perrysburg township being nnani-
nous for Smith, will select delegates favor
able to him. One or two other townships IN ay
do the same. Nearly half of the RePubli-
cans in the county may also desire his NOM
nation, vet being in the min -ity in each
of these towns delegates opposed to him
are selected. He goes into the convention,
gets small vote and is defeated. Had
he been a candidate before Mass con-