Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1876-06-17

Conkling, 80
Hartranit, 5b
Hayes, 81
Jewell, IL
Morton, 1A
After the States had voted Mississippi asked to
record an additional vote of delegates who were
absent when the State was called. The Chair
said it could not be done under the rule. The
chairman of the delegation had made an error in
announcing the vote. The absentee was not
passed. There was no choice on first ballot, and
second ballot was now in order. The chairman
did not report the vote cast in the delegations
and the chairman ruled it the right and privilege
of each delegate to vote his own sentiments.
Carwault OF Pennsylvania, appealed from the
decision. The Chair put the question and an
nounced the decision sustained. scene of great
confusion ensued. A Pennsylvania delegate said
he did not hear his appeal because he did not wish
to hear. The Chair replied with irritation that
his colleague from Pittsburg had dshonored HIM
self by his remarks.
Thompson of Indiana denounced the Chairman
for bringing into convention his personal differ
ences. Consequently the chairman disavowed in
tent to abuse his power. lie confessed his col
league had irrtated him into retort, but Withdrew
his remarks.
Massachusetts made point OF order that the
House was executing its order to ballot, and moth
ing but call of roll was in order. Thornburgh of
Tenn, moved to reconsider the vote, sustaining
ruling of chair in order to give Pennsy lvania
opportunity to be heard He yielded to Cessna
who read the second rule providing that the vote
of each shall be announced by its Chairman and
the next rule there shall be no change of vote
til announced.
persisted in speaking, claiming he was here in the
interests Of peace and harmony and reading in
structons Of Pennsylvania delegates to vote as a
unit for Hartranit.
Stewart of Pennsylvania, said his duty to those
who sent him here to represent them. He
had voted once for Haranft, and on the second
ballot he considered it his duty to represent them
by casting vote for
James &. Blaine.
Fury.of Pa, Of Chester district, said he came
here with credentials of his own district conven-
ton. HIS constituents are almost unit for Blaine
and he recognized no right of any State conyen-
ton to bind him against the views and wishes of
his people. | believe in allowing every man to
vote as his beople desire him and am opposed to
all gag law.
Thompson of Ind, questioned whether dele
gates had an individual right to violate the in
structions of State conventions, and follow per-
sonal views, instead of the directions of the party
in each State.
Hale of Maine, suggested that by unanimous
consent the Pennsylvania delegation be allowed
to onsult, pending the roll CALL to determine and
report their votes and wishes.
Pomeroy OF New York, objected
Van Zsndt Of Rhode Island, claimed that dele
gates who allow themselves to be elected On a
pIatIOTm requiring tuCu W fOtc MS D uuft arc
bound by it. He warned the convention against
becoming mob.
Diver of Penn, argued that it was the practice
OF his State to have delegates to republican
tional convention chosen by State convention, and
not by districts. Accordingly the Pennsylvania
chairman is right in obeying the order of the del
egaton sustaining the unit rule, This unit rule
was adopted by the convention, and the resolution
was written Cunning to the charmau) by you, sir.
Laughter and applause.
,ba,r Araa ~o1 70 nd
as no vote taken on the motion to reconsider,
Pennsy lvania was allowed to stand by the rule.
Thomburg called up again his motion to recon-
slider the vote sustaining the rule in the Pennsyl
vania case.
Tie roll was then called on the motion to re-
consider. Resulted yeas, ISL nays, 359. So the
vote was reconsldered. Mcpherson took the
chair.
Tue question REQUIRED on sustaining the deci
sion of the chair.
Ingersoll of Illinois, took the platform. He
said the question is, has each delegate right to
vote as his people wish to vote, ar can he by party
machinery be led to vote against their wishes, and
his own will and conscience.
Hutchins of N. Y. urged the question whether
| there il order, law and discipline in the republic
can party. lie believed in discipline and advo-
| Gated sustaining the Penn. delegation in main
tanning the unit rule to which their Safe conven-
| ton had prescribed them.
| Van Zandt of X. I. said that to sustain the
charmans ruling would be to disntegrate the re-
publican party, because if these dissenting dele
gates in Penn can disregard the instructions of
| their State convention, they can go away from
here and bolt from any nomination here made.
| Woodford of n. Y. had no sympathy with the
mino, ity vote to be cast from Penn, but he be.
ieved that at the very basis of the existence of
the republican party was the right Of every man
| to cast his vote as he chooses.
1hacher of Kansas urged the convention to
make its own laws. 1t is supreme 1t is Origi-
| al and n n convention caucus rules agree
ments can be brought in here to bind this body.
|