The daily Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1873-1877, 1876-06-27
THE Two-THIRDs RULE.
It's Origin as Stated by One who Par.
ticipated in the Events Of the Time.
To the Editor of The Sun.

To the Editor Of The Sun.
Sir: Gen. Pryor's statement of the
origin and history of the two-thirds rule, |
in yesterdays Sum- is quite correct in so |
far as regards principal facts. His sup |
position that the rule was adopted in order |
TO guard the party against a possible |
nomination, in convention, Of q Demo- |
cratic candidate for the presidency by |
delegates from anti-Democratlc states, is |
wholly erroneous The true cause and |
origin Of the rule was this.
From the foundation of the Federal gov
eminent up to the assembling Of the |
Democratic National Convention Of 1882 |
it had been the practice of the party in all |
the northern states to nominate its candi- |
dates for elective Offices, with the excep-
ton of presidential electors, by conven-
tons Of delegates selected by the people in
primary meetings, while in all the southern
states it was the general practise for candi
dates for Office to nominate themselves or
to consent to run upon the informal re-
quest Of their friends. Indeed, so strong
was the feeling there against nominations
by conventions, that when it was proposed
by the Democrats OF the north, in 1882,
that national convention be called for the
purpose of selecting candidates for presi-
dent and vice-p president, the proposition
was, at first, strongly opposed by the lead
ing men of the south upon two grounds,
First, because such course would be con-
trary to their established practice and
principles in regard to the selection OF
candidates for office; and,
Secondly, for the reason, as stated
by them, that inasmuch as
the southern, or slaveholding states,
would have in the proposed convon-
ton only about one-third of the dele
gates sent there, candidate for the presi-
dency might be selected by majority of
the convention then, or at some future
time, who was obnoxious to them.
The latter objection was urged with great
force and pertinacity, and it was only upon
the understanding and promise of the lead
ing northern men that rule should be
adopted which would insure protection to
the constitutional rights Of the southern
states, that the Democracy of those states
finally consented to, and did send delegates
to the convention. Upon the meeting Of
the convention Mr.. Saunders of North
Carolina, in order to carry into effect the
understanding adverted to, introduced the
two-thirds rule, and it was thereupon
adopted.
1t is true, as Gen. Pryor says, that the
rule was adopted by the first Democratic
national convention ever held, as a funda-
mental principle of the Democratic con-
stitution. But as ] outrank him some
twenty years in active political experience,
he may safely rely upon my memory OF
events in which / myself participated, and
accept as true the facts above stated in re-
gard to the cause and reason of the rule in
question.
Assuming, then, as we may, that the
two thirds rule was adopted forty -four
years ago, upon the demand and at the
instance of the Democrats of the southern
states, for the protection of their constitu-
tional rights, and for no other cause or
purpose, it may we'll be asked, now that
slavery and abolitionists have passed away
together, what reason now exists for the
continuance of that ruler
Originally it was adopted FROM necessity,
and then was, and has ever since remained,
case, sut geaeris, never having been
paralleled or followed in one single in,
stance, in either conventions or elections.
Indeed, it always was rcpugnant to that
vital principle of Democracy which de-
clares that the will of the majority shall
govern; and, except for the necessity Of
the case arising from the existing facts
and fears,it could never have been adopted
JOHN M. BARBOUR.
June 20, 1876.