The weekly democratic statesman. [volume] (Austin, Tex.) 1871-1883, 1880-03-18
THE Two.rHIRDs RULE.

The ErpresI is somewhat mistaken
when 1t says the STATESMAN frankly
admits it has no opinion as tJ the rule
that should control the acts of Demo
cratic conventions. In sn article upon
this subject the STATESMAN said: 800
jections mainly urged against the rule
are that weak men use it to break down
strong ones, and that the party often
does itself discredit by being forced to
accept candidates not indorsed by the
masses. Such have been resu ts, but
at the same time the weight of evil
dence is In favor of the rule. Under
it were nominated Jackson, Van BureD,
Cass, Buchanan, Seymour and Tilden,
all of whom were the most prominent
candidates i'll their time for nomination.
Whether it be prudent, just now, to
change front on this point is difficult
to decide. II there are to be marplots
q. Cincinnati determined to defeat the
best interests of Democracy, then it
were best to preserve the rule; but if
unadultersted Democrats control pri-
maries throughout the country, and
hasty jobs are not imposed upon the
people, there is no danger ahead"
The STATEsMAN's presumption, in the
above paragraph has always been the
stumbling block in the way of adopt
ing the SIMPLE msJority rule. 1t is
rarely, if ever, the case that schemers
do not take deep ''dish" in manlpu-
lating the primaries, and the only sure
preventive against the perfect accom-
plIshment of their purposes is certainly
in the retention of the time-honored
and perfectly safe two-thirds rule.
This rule has saved the party from
much calamity IN the past, and there is
every reason to prove that it may save
it In the fu ure from traps. now and al
ways, being laid for it. The STATES
MANS assumption, that the two-
thirds rule might do no IN
jury, wss based alone upon the
ground that p r vct honesty should
control in the action Of prim .riee but
who ls TO pass Judgment upon the
good or bad intentions of men, who
secretly organize forces that INVADE
conventions and control them? 1t is
argued that the two-thirds vote defeats
strong men and secures COM
promise candidates, and this is
admitted to bt true, but not in ma
jority of instances. In this very
argument which is. Used against the
rule may be discovered its means of
adding strength to the nominee. Par
tissn feeling at times runs so high in
conventions, that compromise candi-
dates became an absolute necessity for
the promotion of peace and harmony.
1t steps IN and shuts out the man of mere
popularity, the machine candidate,
and though the heads of " bar lisp
might be knocked out and left loose
around a convention hall it would
place the barrel roller at great disad-
vantage. The rights of the minority,
too, should be respected, while the ma
jority rule places it in most hopeless
and then, probably, in revengeful po-
sition. Reference is often made to the
rule as now adopted by the Republi-
can party, but we are not after adop-
ting Republican precedents, and be-
sides, the Republican party is one not
of freedom like the Democratic party,
and always becomes a unit in hunting
after the loaves and fishes. From
a national standpoint, particularly, there
is g. strong argument in favor
of holding to the two-thirds rule. In
the organization of third parties the
Democratic party always suffers more
than the Republican party, and at this
particular time there should be no en-
couragement of disaffection through
the instrumentality of arbitrary pro-
ceediDgs on the part of conventions.
The same theory applies to Texas poll
tics, and while much may be lost to
its Democracy by an abrogation of this
traditlonsrY rule, we cannot see how
strength may be gained by adopting a
new one IN the way of an experiment.