Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1880-06-05

while the committee proposed to put their
title beyond question of dispute IN history
He never in his long experience knew of any
man to object to a unanimous Judgment In
his own favor. [Applause.l The gentleman
Hogan had seemed to think that the report
of this committee had insuited the State OF
Illinois. His reply to that was, that the citi-
zen of Illinois was too apt to confound him
self with the State of Illinois. Loud laugh
ter and cheers, half the audience rising and
shouting 1t had been stated in the papers
presented that in the Springfield Convention
it was hard to tell whether it was the State
of Illinois or John A Logan that had held
the Convention. Renewed laughter and ap-
plause
Logan declared that he could not be
affected in the slightest degree by the innu-
endoes of the gentleman from the golden
shores of California, picked up in the Sums
and sloughs of Chicago [applausel-in the in
sinuation that he Iogan) confounded himself
with the State of Illinois. Applause Logan
proceeded at considerable length to explain
and defend his action in the Springfield Con-
vention, being frequently interrupted by ap-
plause. He declared that the charges, insin-
nations and innuendoes aimed at him had
come from those who sought to, but could not
control the Republican majority of Illinois.
His crime against them was that certain
newspapers could not write him down, could
not count him out, could not drive him from
the party. [Cheers.] He defed the men who
undertook to assail him, and was ready to
meet them anywhere.
Raymond rejoined, and denied that he had
made any attack upon Logan. If he had re-
ferred to anything known in the slums of
Chicago, he (Haymond) knew nothing about
! it. Neither Logan nor any other man, no
matter how much covered with military or
civic honors. should stand here and put
words in his mouth that he never uttered.
/ The remark about the gentleman confound-
ing himself with the State of Illinois was not
original with him (Haymond), but quota
ton from the papers presented to the COM
mittee. However the gentleman almost con-
vinced him that the remark was a correct
one. Laughter and applause.
.Sharpe's motion, modified so as to
strike from the majority report so much of
it as implies that there is any contest regard
ing the Illinois delegates at large, was
adopted.
| Cessna then moved the adoption of SO
much OF the committees report as has been
designated as being undsputed. Agreed to.
The Alabama case was then taken up.
Clayton of Arkansas moved to substitute
the minority for the majority report in this
part of 1t.
Bruce of Mississippi moved recess until
7rM. Agreed to at 4:2O P. NJ.
Evening Session.
CHICAGO, June 4th.-.Judge Hoar took his
chair at precisely o'clock, but not more than
forty delegates were in their seats. The
present prospect is that the contested seat
discussion wiz occupy all the evening with
out being disposed Of, unless the Convention
shall adopt some order limiting the debate,
which pronisese-o be interminabe.
At 7:30 the Convention was nearly full.
The entry b. Garfield and Conklipg was
the occasion 81 the usual greeting from the
galleries.
CALLED TO ORDER.
Five minutes later the Chair called the
| Convention to order.
Conger moved that the delegates from
Louisiana, who have been admitted by order
of the Convention, be notified of their right
to take their seats.
The Chair said they were entitled of right
to take such seats.
The Chair stated that the question before
the Convention was the contest in Alabama.
Harrison of Indiana moved to limit the
debate upon it to one hour, and subsequently
modified it so as to make it half an hour.
Pixley of California seconded the motion.
The Pacific coast delegates were becoming
very impatient at the unnecessary delays and
were becoming suspicious that they were for
purpose. IApplause.l
Conkling suggested that the proposition be
so modified as to divide whatever time shall
be allowed equally between the two sides of
the question.
Harrison accepted the suggestion as proper
and right.
Conkling further suggested twenty min
utes to each side.
Harrison's motion having been reduced to
writing in the form of resolution, it was
adopted unanimously. IApplause.l
TIE ALABAMA CASE.
The Chair stated that the question was
upon Clayton's motion to substitute the mi
nority for the majority recommendation in
the Alabama case.
Conger briefly explained Rapier's case by
showing that the only question was to
whether the State Convention had a right to
deprive him of his authority to represent his
district because he refused to vote for Grant.
The same point, substantially, was at issue
in the other two Alabama contests. The
question was simply as to the right of a
single district to representation. Upon its set
tlement, in his (Conger's) judgment, rests the
question Of the continued existence of the
Republican party.
Turner of Alabama replied, simply elab-
Grating the views of the minority report in
the case before the Convention.
Tracy of New York protested against the
Convention opening and deciding upon ques-
tions which ought to be, and which had been,
decided in the State Conventions, and argued
that in the Alabama case it had been clearly
shown that the admission of the contestants
would lead to a Misrepresentation of the dis
trict Had it not been for the questions of
contested seats, the Convention might have
been at its legitimate work on the first even
ing of its session.
Bateman of Ohio supported the majority
report in some forcible remarks, in which he
characterized the State Conventions attempt
to usurp the free right of delegate Rapier to
act in his representative capacity as he should
see ft as a most offensive assertion of arbi-
traIy dictation. Rapier treated it with the
contempt it deserved. [Applause.