Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1880-06-06

terms of the call of the national convention;
did the State convention transcend its author
lty in appointing delegates to the Chicago con-
vention. MIR. Houck said he was unable to as
certain which side he was on and asked for two
minutes time TO make the discovery.
Mr.. Cessna moved to make the allowance of
ten minutes for man who was on neither or
on both sides. (Laughter). MIR. Houck, get
ting two minutes said he would vote for the
report of the committee, but would not yield
that the district conventions were correct in
! their action.
quest OF the contestants. He held that the
tactics of Tammany Hall should not be put up
on the Republican party, and he would not
vote to allow it.
The roll was called for and resulted as fol-
lows: Yeas 476, nays 1S1. So the report of
the majority of the committee was sustained,
and four of the sitting members from Kansas
gave place TO the four contestants, Grant men.
New York cast only % votes. and they were
aye votes. Kansas cast five votes nay.
WEST VIRGINIA.
The next question was on the portion of the
report of the committee on credentials which
relates to West Virginia
Mr.. Conger explained that tine majority fa-
vored the retention of sitting members in West
Virginia. Mr.. Clayton offered a resolution to
substitute the minority for the majority report.
Mr. Raum, speaking on that question, said
he understood that the West Virginia case
stood on exactly the same footing as the ad-
judicated cases of Illinois, Kansas and Ala
bama.
Nj. Cadman (Massachusetts) made an argu-
ment in favor of the Contestants.
MIR. Hagans of West Virginia, held that the
sitting members were elected in the regular
manner; and held that the credentials to this
convention were SIS correct and convincing on
their face as were those of any other delegate
here. He could scarcely comprehend why the
contest was made at all. Being asked what
was the actual complexion as to the choice for
President in the contested district, Hagans
said he had no personal knowledge on the sub
ject, as he lived $50 miles from the contested
district. His interrOgator answered that he
lived too far away, and that he was not COM
petent witness.
Mr.. Butterworth interrogated Eagan as to
whether there was not an agreement between
the parties IN this contest, that newspaper
statement. should be taken rs the record before
the State convention. Mr.. Raymond of Cali
fornia made speech in favor of the sitting
members as being real representatives of the
districts.
On the melton of Mr.. Conger debate was
here closed and the roll was called on the uues-
tlon of the substitution of the minority for
Cue inaJOFlty report. lt resulted as follows:
Yeas All. nays $50, SO the contestants from
West Virginia are admitted The result re-
duced Blaine two, and adds one to Sherman
and one to Grant.
1t was claimed that both sides preserved the
principle of district representation, as con-
trolled in the Illinois case, but the difference
was as to the facts, the Sherman men, for
instance. claiming that it had been agreed to
accept the account of the proceeding of the
district convention as contained in the
newspapers. The amended report was then
adopted.
UTAH.
The Utah case was taken up, and debate was
limited to fifteen minutes on each side. After
short discussion, IN which 1uthill, Clayton,
Raymond Goldman and others participated, a
scene of considerable excitement nsued as
Mr. Houck of Tennessee attempted to speak
beyond his time and was declared to be out of
order, but declined to yield. Finally the vote
was taken on substitution of the minority for
the majority report. The vote resulted in IA
vOr of the substitution as follows; Yes 424, NAYS
3l2. So the contestants are admitted. They
are Grant men. The report as amended was
then adopted. This closed the report of the
committee on credentials