Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1876-06-16


honored himself by his remark.
A DENUNCIAIloN AND AN APOLOGY.
Mr.. thompson (Int.) severely denounced
the chairman for bringing into the area of
this convention his D srson al fferences
subsequently the chairman disavowe.
any intent to abuse his powers, aud con
Tetort, but be withdrew his remarks.
Massachusetts made paint of order that
The house was executing Its order 10 ballot,
al nothing but call OF the roll was In
Mr.. Thornbureh (Tenn) moved to recon-
slider The vote sustaining the ruling OF the
chair, In order TO give Pennsylvania an OPP
He yielded to Mr., Cessna, who read the
second rule, providi6g that the vote of each
stste shall be announced by its chairman,
ara The next rule, that there shall be no
change OF vote until announced.
GREAT CONFUSION
here eDsued, lasting some time. Mr.. Cessna
persisted In spea king, claiming he was here
In the interests OF peace and harmony and OF
The reading of the instructions TO the Penn
sylvan1a delegates TO vote as q unit for
dartranft. Applause and confusiou.l
Mr. Stewart, of Pa said his duty In those
who sent him here to represent Them was
paramount He had voted once for Hart
rsnft, and on the ID ballot he Considered il
his duty to represent them by Casting a yate
Tor james u. Blaine. Laughter and cheers
Mr.. Futhy, Pa of the Chester district,
SAID ne came here with credentials OF his
are
ALMOST UNIT FOR BLAINE,
Senon Snd e6s@ OF
his people. He was entitled to vote the senti-
ments of himself and those who sent him
MI; Hale (Me) suggested that by the
delegation they be allowed to retire to con-
suit pending the roll call to determine and
report their votes and wishes. He would
trust that delegation with this question.
Mr.. Pomeroy (N.Y. objected.
MI. Nanzandt (R: ~ claimed that the dele
gates who had allowed themselves to be
elevated on the platform, requiring them
to vote as unit, are bound by It. He warned
the convention against becoming a mob.
Mr.. oliver, OF Pennsylvania, argued that
IL was the practice in his state to have the
delegates to the repu blican national conven-
tion chosen by the state convention. and not
by the districts. Accordingly the Pennsyl-
tb ania chairman an had been right In ooeying
unit rule. This unit rule was adopted by
the convention VI animously. believe In
siiowlpg every man to vote as bis people
OPPOSED To ALL GAG LAW,
Mr.. Thompson asked whether we have the
lndlvidual right TO violate the instructions
sonal views instead of the directions of the
party In each state. de urged that
the Pennsylvania delegates were bound
e pecv On Of Justice honor
me resolution was written (turning to the
chalIman) by you, sir. daughter and APP
The chairman
ORDERED THE RoLL-CALL TO PROCEED,
and no vote was taken on the motion to re-
consider, Pennsylvania being allowed to
stand-66 for Hartranft, for Blaine.
Mr.. Thornburg (Tenn.) called up again his
motion 70 reconsider the vote Susta ming the
ruling OF the chair in the Pennsylvania case.
The roll was called on
THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER,
and resulted--yeas 3S1, nays $50. So
THE VOTE WAS RECONSTRUCTED.
question REQUIRED on sustaining the decision
OF the chair.
Mr.. Ingersoll (IlL) took the platform. ZAP
plause He said the question is, has each
delegate q right TO vote as his people wish
him TO vote, or can he by party machinery
be tied 10 vote against their own wishes, his
own will and conscience? We can't sustain
force things in this way. What we want to
md Is the choice Of this convention and the
Mr. Hotchkiss, of New York. urged that
the question is whether there is order, law,
or discipline in the republican party; wne.
ther, when this convention has made its
believed in discipline, and advocated sus
tanning the Pennsylvania delegation in
maintaining unit rule, TO which their state
party i'm their state, had prescribed.
Mr.. Van Zapdt, of Rhode Island, said that
to sustain the chairman's ruling, would dis
these dissenting delegates In Pennsylvania
can disregard the instructions OF their state
convention they can 60 away from here and
bolt from any nomination here made.
Mr.. woodford, OF New York, said he had
no sympathy with the minority vote sought
to be cast from Pennsylvania, but he be-
neved the very basis of the existence OF the
republican party was the right OF every man
to cast his vote precisely as he chooses.
AN APPEAL FOR FREEDoM OF ACTION.
Mr.. Thacher, Of Kansas, urged that this
convention make its own laws. II is su-
preme, IL Is original, and no convention or
caucus rules or agreements can be brought
In here TO bind this body. We are not here
TO be driven like machines. There is some
feeling that there is too much machinery
already In the party. Let every man vote
PRECEDENT OF 1888
Mr.. Hale, OF Maine, said that In 1868 the
republican party in the Chicago convention
had this question up on the Vice Presidency;
That Pennsylvania there presented one OF
her sons under instruction from her state to
present and stand by him. A single dele
gate from Pfttsburg then asserted the prin-
ciple OF individual right to vote as he pleas
ed. He was Overwhelmingly sustained, and
the chairman was instructed to cast the
vote, so as to recognize the individual vote.
Mr.. Hale expressed regret that this side
issue had arisen TO interfere with the regu-
Lar course of business.
Tennessee demanded and Virginia sus-
tanned the previous question.