New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1880-06-06


of Tennessee, asked if the chairman of the commit
tee held that the State Convention had exceeded its
authority in appointing the entire ten delegates.
| " Not at ALL" replied Mr.. COnger. Mr. HOuck went
on to address the Convention, but was called to or
der by the Chair it not being apparent which slde
| he wos on. Continuing, Mr.. HOuck argued that as
the action of the State Convention was analogous 10
that of the Electoral College, he held that 1t was
| regular.
| General Warner Bateman, Of Ohio, advocated the
claims of the contestants. There was, he sad' IN
the largest district of Kansas large majority 1or
one of the Presidential candidates, he would not
say which one and in the two smaller districts there
were small majorities for another candidate. The
action of the State Convention he said. was shaped
to give the voice of the delegation to The favorte
of the larger district. He did not wish to see
| Tammany tactics incorporated among the
| principles OF the Republican party tactics
| by which William NJ. Tweed aud John
Kelly had been able in New-York CITY
| to override magnificent Republican mojorities IN
the State. The roll-call of States was demanded
resulting in the adoption of the majority report py
| 476 to 1S4, a result highly complimentary 10 the
sense of fairness of the maj ority both OF the COLL
mittee aud of the Convention.
THE WEST VIRGINIA CONTEST.
! The West Virginia contest was then taken up
and Mr.. Conger explained the position Of the ma
testants elected by District Conventions, it ap-
peared that they had not had majority in their
districts. The minority report was read,
and Captain John Goldman. o Massachusetts
delegate, mounted the platform to advocate the
claims of the contestants, declaring that he had
acted consistently in support of the claims of dele
gates elected by District Conventions as against
those of delegates who represented only the voice
| of the State Convention:
Chairman Conger then said that although he had
presented as in duty bound, the opinion of the ma
jorty he did not share IN that opinion. The contest
in this case in far its partisan bearing is con-
cerned, is between the friends of Blaine and those
of Sherman. A West Virginia delegate set forth
at length the circumstances of the case
substantially as they have been published
A running cOloquy without especial point, ensued
between Mr. Houck, Of Tennessee, and the West
Virginia delegate. Upon a roll-call of States, the
question being motion substituting the minority
report favorable to the two contestants for the re-
port of the majority the result was AT ayes, and
$50 nays 1t was noticed that in this rocall, rs
general thing, the Grant and Edmunds men voted
for the Sherman contestants, Indicative OF any in-
clination to combine against Blaine, as foremost
candidate. There was however, too much reflection
from party lines to warrant the assumption that the
course was in accordance with any understanding.
The Ohio vote was divided, % votes being for the
contestants and 16 for the sitting members, that
division probably indicating the relative strength
of Sherman and Blaine in the State. By the res ut
Secretary Sherman secures two votes and Senator
Blaine loses two. The relative vote which was al
most exclusively cast by Blaine men was much
| larger than had been expected, and was very ell
| couragng to the friends of tho Maine Senator.
TIE UTAH PERPLExITIEs SETTLED.
| The Utah case was then taken up, and ex-GOver-
nor Clayton, of Arkansas, moved to substitute the
report of the minority which favorable to the
contestants for that Of the majority. Mr. Clay ton
explained the question at issue. The territorial
committee of Utah met. and without
calling a territorial Convention themselves
selected the delegates. The committee then passed
a resolution perpetuating their official power.
Some OF the Republicans of the Territory dis
satisfied with this action, and call having been is
sued, a mass-meeting was held aud cOntesting dele
gates were elected. Mr. Raymond, of Califor-
mia. advocated the claims Of the sitting
delegates. He said that west of the
Rocky Mountains the long distance to be
travelled and other physical reasons, made it im-
possible at timGs to hold conventions fairly pre-
eentng all parts of territories. So regularly con-
stituted committee had, in year of unusual Sc
verify taken the work in hand, course Of proceed
ure which accords with many precedents
Captain Goldman, of Massachusetts,, advocated
tho claims of the contestants. Judge Blake, Of
| Montana. followed, saying that the mass-meeting
| was not O meeting of Republicans such. but OF
| Republicans who were in opposition to the action
| of the committee. If the committees action had
| been other than it was these men would not have
| come here to contest.
| Calob Taylor. an old gentleman from Pennsyl-
| vania made an impassioned speech In advocacy Of
the rights of districts asserting that they had been
struggling for twenty years in Pennsylvania
against the encrOachments Of the State Conventions
One Of the contestants spoke in his own behalf rs
| accusations. he said, had been made lmpeaching
their Repubcanism., He declared that they were
| not Mormons; he pleaded for "a chance" as tho
representative of the Republicans OF Utah, so that
they might hold their own, not only as against the
! Democrats, but against MOrmonism A cOlOred del
| egate from Mississippi made pOlntlcss speech in
advocacy of the majority report asking the contest
| ants whether they represented the Brigham
| Young interest" or not. He received no reply.
| The ro-call resulted as follows: 420 yeas to 312
| navs. The sitting members are Blaine men and the
| contestants Grant men, This was the last con-
| Grant gained two votes and Blaine lost two. As on
the previous vote, the result bore evidence to the
fact that Blaine is now the leading candidate The
DISPOSITION OF the supporters of all other candidates
| to combine against him was very apparent,
| Massachusetts, and Vermont men voted sOlIdly with
| the Grant men-ths action being undisgulsed by
| a bid on the part of Senator EdmundS supporters
for the Grant strength when the expected break Oc
| ours The vote of Pennsylvania on this question
| was % for the Grant ana 80 for the Blame men,
A HEAVY GRANT DEFEAT.
THE SECOND ACT IN THE DAY sEssIoN-GENERAL
| SHARPE IN THE INTEREST or THE GRANT