The Portland daily press., 1880-06-05

to the convention that he should obey the in
struction that the State delegation should vote
as a unit for Grant In the case OF Smith and
\. arner in Alabama the facts were substan-
a lily the same as in the case of Rapier. These
espective districts and the State convention
undertook to revoke their appointment because
they failed to accept tie unit rule. The COM
mittee recommend their admission.
In Illinois the committee recommend the
admission of the contestants to the seats of
the sitting members from LIST, Sd, 4th, 9th, 9th
10th, 18th and 18th Congressional districts.
The well-known facts were stated. The COM
mittee also reported against the contestants in
the I'd Illinois district and do not sustain the
objection to the four delegates-at-arge in the
same State.
They further report in favor of the sitting
members from the 9th and 10Th districts of
Pennsylvania, and the Sd district of West
Virginia.
The committee suggests that the final de-
cison of many of these contests depends upon
the adoption by the convention of the principle
Of Congressional district representation. This
the committee believed to be sound. ZAP
plause) The report cites J. D. Cameron s
support of the right of individual district re-
presentations at the convention of 1876 under
precisely similar circumstances and a similar
call for National convention. They cite the
form of the call of the convention in 1868 as
evidence that it was the principle of the
Republican party to establish the principle of
district representation This was sustained
also by all the precedents in the party down to
date. In no case has the fair action of dis
trict in selecting its representatives been over
ruled or changed by any State or National con-
vention. (Applause.)
The committee do not believe that this right
of Congressional district REPRESENTATION should
now be invaded for the first time by the action
ton can by bare majority override the will of
the people fairly expressed in the selection of
district delegates, it might as we'll appoint at
once all the delegates. Great applause) No
nominations made through such misrepresenta-
ton were likely to be ratified by the people.
1t was the duty of the convention to disap-
prove emphatically of all attempts to override
the high moral customs of the party. Zap
plause.) The committee sustain the sitting
delegates from Utah as regularly and fairly
chosen
Mr.. Clayton of Arkansas presented the
minority report. 1t differs from the report of
the majority as to the application Of the princi-
pie of district representation. The recon-
mendations of the majority, if adopted, would
work as an eG post .fdcto rule, reversing the
long established usage of the party in many
States. (Applause.) They urge that there is
no vacancy in the district claimed by Rapier,
and that the sitting members are entitled to
the seats which the majority report awards to
Smith and Warner The minority SAYS as
Rapier refused to accept the pledges exacted
by the State convention, he is here without
credentials; also that he was not elected by his
district but only nominated, and that except
thrt ugh the action of the State convention
ratifying the nomination he had no authority
whatever. 1t did not appear that there had
been any district convention in Alabama at
which the Alabama contestants had been
chosen; their authority here could rest only on
action in the State convention. If the principle
of district representation is the sound one,
then more than half the delegates sitting in
this convention are here without right, and
if the rule is rigidly applied, the body would
find itself without quorum. (Applause.)
In the case of Illinois the minority report
makes an elaborate statement of alleged facts,
but gives nothing in addition to what has al
ready been fully given. 1t recommends the
sitting members be retained in their seats as
duly accredited representatives. 1t also nom
concurs with the majority in the cases of Utah
and West Virginia. 1t also defends the right
of the State convention to instruct its dele
gates to vote as unit according to its will and
presents an argument in support of the same.
Its utterance on this point were received with
considerable applause in which Conkling con-
spicuously Joined. The report is very vol
luminous.
The minority report is signed by B. T. Tracy
of New York, Powell Clayton of Arkansas and
others.
Mr.. COnger handed in a corrected list of the
members of the convention as reported by his
committee. He then moved the convention to
proceed to consider the Louisiana case.
Mr.. Cessna moved to adopt all the report in
which the committee had agreed including
Louisiana, and then proceed to separate the
consideration of disputed issues involving con-
tests in Alabama, Illinois, West Virginia and
Utah.
Mr.. Conkling called for an enumeration Of
questions which would fall within the list OF
undisputed cases.
Mr.. Conger said this list would embrace the
cases of Louisiana, the I'd district of Illinois,
Illinois delegates at large, I'd and 4th districts
of Kansas and 9Th and 10Th districts of Penn.
sylvania.
Mr.. Logan inquired how it happened there
was any report as to the four delegates at large
from the State of Illinois. 1t was the first
time he had heard of the right to their seats
being questioned.
Mr.. Conger replied that petitions against
the right of four delegates at large had been
presented to the convention and referred to
the committee and hence it was necessary for
the committee to notice that subject in its
report.
Mr.. Logan Indignantly protested against his
right to a seat being called into question, and
intimated that he perfectly we'll understood
the object of it. He submitted that he was
entitled to fair play, and he complained of the
treatment to which he and men who had led
the armies of the nation to victory had been
subjected CHEERS for Grant)
A Kansas delegate objected to the inclusion
of Kansas in the list of undisputed questions,
and Mr.. Cessna modified his melton SO as to
give separate action on the Kansas case.
Mr.. Sharpe moved to amend the pending
motion so as to strike from the majority report
SO much of it as relates to the Illinois delega-
ton at large. (Applause.)
Mr.. Conger replied to Logan in good hui
mored sarcaStlcal manner that caused roarS of
laughter.
Mr.. Logan returned to the charge and asked
why distinction had been made as to dele
gates at large between the State of Illinois
and other States.
Mr.. Cessna, member of the committee, re-
piled that the reason was that objection had
been made to the deiegates at large from Illi-
nois and none to those from any other State.
Mr.. Conger having accepted Mr.. Cessna IS
amendment the convention then adopted it
without objection.
The chair ruled Sharpe's amendment out of
order but afterwards admitted it.
Raymond, of California, pointed out that if
Sharpe's motion should prevail, it will leave
the seats of Illinois delegates contested, while
the committee proposed to put their title be-
yond question or dispute in history. He never,
in his long experience, knew any man to OBJ
iect to an unanimous Judgment in his own
favor. (Applause.) The gentleman Nogan)
had seemed to think the report of this commit
tee had insulted the state of Illinois His re-
ply to that was that the citizen of Illinois
WIS tOO apt 10 COillOuuu himself Win the state
of Illinois. loud laughter and cheers, half
the audience rising and shouting.) It had
been stated in the papers presented that as to
the Springfield convention it was hard to tell
whether it was Illinois or John A. Logan
that held the convention. (Renewed laughter
and applause.)
Logan declared he could not be affected in
the slightest degree by the inunendoes of the
gentleman from the golden shores of Califor-
mia or men picked up in the slums and sloughs
of Chicago, (applause) or by the insinuation that
he Uogan) confounded himself with the state
of Illinois, (Applause.) Logan proceeded at
considerable length to explain and defend his
action in the Sprinfeld convention, being fire.
gently interrupted with applause.
Mr.. Raymond, rejoining, denied that he
had made any attack upon Mr.. Logan. If he
had referred to anything known in the slums of
Chicago he (Haymond) knew nothing about it.
The remark about the egentleman's confonnd-
ing himself with the State of Illinois was
quotation from the papers presented to the
committee. However, the gentleman almost
convinced him that the remark was correct
one. daughter and applause.)
Mr.. Shapes motion, modified so as to strike
from the majority report so much of it as i'm
plies there is any contest regarding the Illinois
delegation-at-large, was adopted.
Mr.. Cessna then moved the adoption of so
much of the committees report as had been
designated as being undisputed. Agreed to.
The Alabama case was then taken up.
Mr.. Clayton, of Arkansas, moved to substi-
tute the minority for the majority report in
this part of it.
Mr.. Bruce, of Mississippi, moved a recess
oil IL h oh A