The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1880-05-27

ondea by DR.. Brown:
Whereas the approaching Convention OF
the Democratic party OF South Carolina has
been called to meet in the city Of Columbia
on the first day Of June next, with special
reference to the meeting of the National
Democratic Convention at Cincinnati and
whereas the commencement OF the State
canvass ut such an early date would prove
burden to the agricultural interests of the
State, and in our opinion be disastrous to
the best interests of the Democracy, which
at this time needs short, sharp and enthu-
siastic campaign; therefore be it
Resolved, That it is the sense of this Con-
yention that the June Convention should
confine its work to the election Of delegates
to the Cincinnati Convention, and leave all
matters pertaining to the nomination OF q
State ticket and presidential electors to be
made ut lnter date.
Mr.. Crayton advocated the adoption OF
his resolution in a short but pointed speech,
in which he expressed the opinion that it
would be unfortunate for both the party
and the people at large for nominations to
be made in June. He thought there could
be nothing lost by the party in waiting, but
that a great deal would be gained. The
campaign should be short, sharp and en-.
thusiastic.
The resolution was unanimously adopted.
Il. II. Russell moved that the returns OF
the various Clubs on the question of plu-
rality or majority rule in the primary cleo
ton be now received and the result asccr-
tanned.
]. L. Orr suggested that it would bep proper
to submit the question in resolution, either
continuing the plurality system or adopt
ing that of the majority, whereupon Maj.
Russell introduced resolutions approving
the plan of choosing candidates by primary
election, and continuing the plurality rule
as the best and most practicable for all pur-
poses.
DR.. w. C. Brown supported the resolu-
tions in a short speech, fnvoring the plural
ity rule because lie thought it the most just
R. w. Simpson opposed the resolution,
and spoke at some length in advocacy Of
the majority rule. He said the plurality
rule was very repugnant to large part of
the party, and did not think the demands
made for change by the minority could
be safely ignored. There was very strong
minority, if there was not really mujority,
of the people who were opposed to the old
system, and in acting on this important
question the wishes of the entire people
should be carefully considered. He regard
ed it advisable to have dozen elections in
determining the candidates of the party
rather than have shorter mode and cause
disruption. lie hoped the calls of the
minority for change would be needed,
and that rule would ot be passed that
all parties would not abide by.
T. H. Russell favored the primary election
system above all others for nominating car
didates, and thought it should be adopted
for even State nominations. He thought
the party in this County should be slow to
make any change in the rules that had
worked so we'll in the past, and hoped the
plurality rule would be continued.
D.. H. Russell thought the discussion not
only useless one, as the delegates had all
come with instructions, but that it was out
of order, and hoped the Chair would so
rule.
The Chairman ruled that the resolutions
were debatable, and stated that the fact-that
delegates had been instructed by their Clubs
to vote certain way did not render the dis
cussion out Of order.
3. F. Crayton favored the resolutions be-
cause lie believed that the plurality rule was
the best, and thought the frequent elections
that would be rendered necessary by the
majority rule would generate bad feeling.
He knew of no dissatisfaction over the re-
suit of the primary elections held hereto
fore, and hoped no change would be made
this year.
Joseph B. Moore thought Mr. Crayton
failed to represent the popular feeling of
the Democracy of the County when he said
there was no dissatisfaction over the result
of the last primary election because of the
plurality rule. He wanted the majority
rule adopted, as he regarded it absolutely
necessary for the future unity of the party.
L. E. Campbell favored the resolutions
because he thought the plurality rule was
just, and best for all practicable purposes.
He did not think the people would turn
out to second or third election, and could
see no reason why the old rule should not
be continued.
H. NJ. Prince opposed the resolutions,
and wanted the majority rule adopted. He
regarded the system heretofore III vogue as
god.send to demagogucs and tricksters,
and thought it tended to lessen the conf.
dence of the people in their party leaders.
w. w. Russell moved that further speech
cs on the resolutions be limited to five min
utes. r. S. Crayton moved to amend the
motion by making it three minutes. After
some little discussion the motica as amend
cd was adopted.
NJ. B. Williams then reopened the dis
cussion OF the resolutions, favoring the
plurality rule us the best, and expressing
the belief that no one would be opposed to
it unless they desired to run as all indepcn-
dent candidate.
]. L. Orr opposed the resolutions, and
hoped the majority rule would be adopted.
which he regarded in keeping with the spir-
it and principles of the Democracy, and
thought more general satisfaction would be
secured by discontinuing the plurality rule.
j. w. Norris was opposed to the resolu-
tions and wanted the majority rule adopted.
]. l.. Orr then offered the following sub
stitute for Maj. Russell's resolutions:
Resolred, That it is the sense of this Con-
vention that every candidate at the primary
election shall be required to receive ma.
jority of all the votes cast before he shall he
the nominee of the Democratic party.
P. K. McCully demanded the ayes and
nays, and ". w. Russell moved that the
delegations from Clubs be allowed to cast
the full vote to which their Clubs were en-
titled. Mr.. Russel's motion was adopted,