Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1880-05-07
THE RIGHTS OF DELEGATES TO IG-
MORE INSTRUCTIONS.

other State Conventions will refuse to be
bound by their instructions, and as it
might appear at first sight that the right
to bolt was unconditional, and applied
equally in all cases, it is in order to exam
inc this question with some care. In the
first place it must be admitted that the
primary purpose of the appointment of
delegates to the National Convention
should be to represent the will of the ma
jority of the party as faithfully as possible.
To whatever extent this purpose is de-
parted from, the true intent of all such
political action is defeated. Ii, for exam
pie, State Convention is packed with the
friends of one candidate, and II that can
didate is not the choice of the majority OF
the party in the State, the passage OF
resolutions of instruction ought not to be
considered binding upon the delegates,
because it is obvious that these instructions
do not represent the real will of the party,
and because if the delegates adhere to them
they must 90 counter to the party choice.
But when the State Convention is con-
trolled by the friends of one candidate,
and it is well understood that that candi-
date is the first choice of the majority of
the party in the State, instructions to vote
for him must be regarded as binding, be-
cause they unqestionably represent the will
of the party. In the present canvass we
have examples of both kinds. In New
York and Pennsylvania the State Conven-
tions were packed in the interest of
candidate who is evidently not the first
choice of the majority of the party in
either of those States. The delegates were
instructed to vote for that candidate, and
their instructions, if adhered to, can only
result in defeat of the will of the party.
In California, on the other hand, the
State Convention faithfully represented the
will of the majority of the party. There
is no room for controversy on the statement
that James g. Blaine is the favorite can
didate of three-fourths of the Republicans
in this State, and for any journal to pre-
tend not to be aware of this fact is ridicu-
lous. In instructing the delegates to Chi
cago, therefore, our Convention merely
carried ont the popular will, and the proof
of this lies In the universal acquiescence of
the party in the action of the Convention
Had it sent the delegates uninstructed it
certainly would not have satisfied the
party, and had it instructed them for any
other candidate than Blaine it would have
incurred general and earnest condemnation.
Under the circumstances, and knowing
what the rank -and-file wanted, it could
not have done anything else than what it
did.
Where, however, the Conventions have
VIGOROUSLY been put up by the machine"
managers, as in New York and Pennsyl-
vania, the case is altogether different.
There the delegates are called upon to
choose between representation of the "ma-
"chine," and representation of the party,
and if they decide for the latter they can
not be blamed The machine managers
cannot set up the claim OF bad faith against
them, seeing that they themselves have
acted throughout in utter contempt of the
real opinions and wishes of the party.
They are usurpers, who have deliberately
undertaken to force the nomination of a
candidate not wanted by the party, and
their instructions are fraudulent in
essence, since they require the delegates
to ignore the will of the party, and to
pay allegiance to those who are in open
opposition to that will. Should those
delegates refuse to be bound by their
instructions, therefore, they would only be
asserting the pre-eminence of their duty to
the party, and denying their allegiance to
the usurping sc machine managers and
such course would very evidently be in
the interests of good government. In this
State, however, there is no such ground of
difference between the Convention and the
party. They are in complete harmony,
and the delegates to Chicago could conse-
quently disobey their instructions only by
ignoring the will of the party. In other
words, while the Eastern delegates must
outrage public opinion if they adhere to
their instructions, the California delegates
would do the same thing if they did not
adhere to their instructions, and herein
consists the fundamental distinction be-
tween the cases. There has been no COM
plant among Republicans of the So
called "ironclad resolutions" and the
Alta is entirely alone in its strange fault
finding. What the Convention could have
done other than what it did, our contem-
porary does not appear to have made clear
to itself, but if it holds that the delegates
should have been sent to Chicago without
instructions, we must say that to have
taken that course would have necessitated
very direct and inexcusable defiance
of the party will in the premises. No
boiling in the California delegation would,
in fact, be honorable or admissible, and
those who attempt to show that they could
fairly disregard their instructions have un-
dertaken an impracticable task.
|