Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1880-09-30
Aamcaster f,ltelllgemrer.
THURSDAY EVENING. SEPT. 30, 1890.
ManifcstIy Rotten.

ManffestIy Rotten.
To outside observers the Democratic
split in Philadelphia over the district at
torneyship seems to he very absurd and
if there is any sense in it there must he
a great deal of rascality in it also. Mani
festly no sane Democrat expects to elect
either candidate with two in the field,
and the logical conclusion is that those
who are responsible for this division do
not wish to elect either and have caused
it TO come about i'm the interest of the
Republican candidate for the disputed
Office.
We say this on the assumption that
this Democratic division has been TO-
mented, and is not the incident of sud
den outbreak of unruliness of temper.
1t has all the ear-marks of deliberatiOn.
For some time the newspapers have been
full of reports that some Of the Demo
cratic leaders proposed to nominate
Hagcrt with the purpose of securing
through his unpopularity the election of
the Republican Graham. This was a
very remarkable story, and one difficult
to credit. Yet it was told on every side
and the Times gave it editorial endorse
ment. Certainly the occurrences ut the
nominating convention 60 far to sustain
it. The chairman, one Cantrell, who in
the Hagcrt interest refused the creden-
tials of the delegates of one of the wards
opposed to Hagcrt, on the ground that
they had not been handed in to him before
ten o'clock in the morning, rs required
by the rules. IL is true that this is the
requirement of the rules and it is also
true that the rejected delegation was
headed by one Burke of unsavory memory
who was put out of the Lancaster Demo-
cratic state convention for voting in the
name of Il delegate. Burkc's character,
however, is not involved in the present
issue. lie claims that he could not find
Cantrell, the chairman, during:the morn-
ing before 10 o'clock, SO us to present his
credentials and it is stated that Cantrel
kept himself in hiding from all the dele
gates whom he did not want to find him
before the opening of the convention.
That this charge is true is made very
probable by his conduct rs presiding Otli-
Ger, in resolutcly refusing to receive these
credentials, although he was urged to do so
in the interest of harmony and fairness
by some of the respectable delegates who
We're Mr.. IIagcrt's friends. But evil
IDENTIFY he had his appointed work to do,
which was to secure the nomination of
Mr.. ITasert regardless entirely OF that
conciliatiOn of his opponents which the
sincere friends of Mr.. IIagert must have
desired to secure. 1t looks very much
indeed us though the plot was to force
the split in the convention which occur
red certainly Mr.. Temple, Mr.. Stevenson,
and the other opponents OF Mr.. Iagcrt
were of sufficient consequence to have
been treated with courtesy and cOnces-
sion; instead of which they were grossly
outraged and driven from the cOnyen-
tiOn. Certainly no one of self respect
could have been expected to stay in u
body which thus abused them and tram
pied upon theirrights. We cannot COM
plain that they left. But they might
have done better than organize
another convention. Certainly they
had no authority to nominate Mr.. Shep-
parl, and their action cannot receive the
support Of the party. They should Sim
ply have left the convention to which
they were elected under protest, and
have carried their complaint to the party
organization. Surely if they can show
that organization the conspiracy to set
tie Hagert to elect Graham, and the
wrongs inflicted upon them in its eXecu-
ton, i remedy will b. found il the Or
ganizatinn is not worthless and corrupt :;
which it ought not to be after it has SO
lately left the creative arms of the Dem
Ocratic state conventions peace commits
sion.
TIE namOcracy nf Alabama a,1 OIL